["Risky" Loan] borrower [marcotheminer]

[marcotheminer]

Great way to have discussion on this forum: attack and slander. 2 thumbs up.

Its actually libel since it was written. But uh, you didn't address the point of why you are advertising a Ponzi in your sig. Care to take the opportunity to do so?

I mark it as it is: a possibly risky investment. It is very possible it is legitimate please see: https://t.me/arbitrageops

For those who don't want to click and think for themselves, that group shows some possible arbitrage opportunities. Their youtube on revenue generation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9S6nWwpn2c. 50% interest in 3 months. Is that far-fetched? Not to me, hence why it *could* be a real trading bot.

[Quickseller]

It would probably be best to remove the advertisement. Sure, it *might* not be a Ponzi scam, however the overwhelming chance is that it is.

[marcotheminer]

It would probably be best to remove the advertisement. Sure, it *might* not be a Ponzi scam, however the overwhelming chance is that it is.

Done. I apologise to those I offended, I did not think it would attract such negativity toward my character/account.

[tmfp]

As my negative feedback for Marco was based solely on him running a Ponzi sig, I have removed it as per our PM conversation.

[DireWolfM14]

This is all very convoluted and confusing.  Quickseller, marcotheminer, 2double0, and hacker1001101001 all seem to be entangled with each other in one way or another.  I'm not suggesting they are all linked accounts, I don't have any hard proof of that, but there several odd things that seem to suggest they may be under the control of the same person.

In this thread marcotheminer all but admits he has a claim on the account 2double0.  Hacker1001101001 funded the loan, but there were some strange transactions between the two addresses prior to funding the loan.  In this thread Quickseller makes the claim that 2double0 and hacker1001101001 are connected based on the funny business with the addresses.

Gunthar provides compelling evidence that Quickseller posted a PGP signed message, but the message was signed by marcotheminer.

Again, I don't know what's going on, but there does seem to be some strange happenings with these accounts.  


http://archive.fo/fDbGL
http://archive.fo/mLzuT
http://archive.fo/e3u09

[Quickseller]

Gunthar provides compelling evidence that Quickseller posted a PGP signed message, but the message was signed by marcotheminer.

Perhaps you should read this thread before posting

although I would not be surprised if he posted it somewhere and the logic is convoluted.

I have found it on https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=147773 (trust page of marcotheminer.) you may have a look from there.

It looks like it stems from this, which looks like for some reason keybase was saying a PGP message that I signed was signed by marco. It appears that marco might have deleted his keybase account, however based on what I posted at the time, the "proof" keybase had for the PGP key associated with marco's key was not signed by my key.

It looks like the issue of me possibly being the same as marco was cleared up here in a GitHub issue for keybase.

According to one of what I believe to be devs of keybase, marco was one of the "alpha" users of keybase, and never proved ownership of the PGP key in his keybase profile (mine). It looks like he input my public key as being his, and never verified it (because he doesn't have the private key) -- note at the time, I was one of the most trusted people here. According to the dev, this was a bug in the keybase software and a fix was made in Early 2017, when this was reported.

As an alternative, you should review the thread you are citing.

[The Cryptovator]

I am agree with OP, asking multiple loan at the same time is too risky. Problem is lender will not aware about his previous loan if they never bother to read post history. Since marcotheminer have lot of positive feedback's perhaps lender will trust him. I am not telling he will scam or he deserve red tag just for asking loan. Neutral feedback would be appropriate in my opinion. So lender will aware about his previous loan.

[DireWolfM14]

Perhaps you should read this thread before posting.

I did read the thread, and your explanation.  To be honest I don't find your argument as compelling as the evidence Gunthar provided.  Again, note the use of the compelling.  I'm not necessarily convinced all these accounts are connected, but there's enough to make me suspicious.  

[TalkStar]

I am agree with OP, asking multiple loan at the same time is too risky. Problem is lender will not aware about his previous loan if they never bother to read post history. Since marcotheminer have lot of positive feedback's perhaps lender will trust him. I am not telling he will scam or he deserve red tag just for asking loan. Neutral feedback would be appropriate in my opinion. So lender will aware about his previous loan.

Basically you can't do anything if lender trust him and accepting him after observing his recent activity. Its not gonna make any sense what we talk about that borrower IMO. Its clear that this borrower recent activity is not kinda favourable for having loan but what we can do if someone still ready to offer him.

OP is trying to make everyone careful about this kinda user and I appreciate it humbly.

[timerland]

I wouldn't say that taking out all of these loans makes him a scammer instantly. But it's definitely irresponsible and untrustworthy behavior to be taking out multiple loans at the same time, while the previous ones haven't even been repaid yet.

Given the fact that the amounts that he's been borrowing has been increasing over the past few attempts, it could be possible that he is trying to build up his reputation through his borrowing activities (which he used to be a lender, to be fair). My advice to lenders is that you shouldn't take into account past repayments as much when assessing your risk, because it can mislead you when you are lending without collateral.

But promoting an obvious ponzi in his sig, even if it's been pointed out that it "may" be a ponzi, is unacceptable. At least he has removed this, though.

[Vod]

I am not marco.

Hmm, knowing quicky always lies, this is enough to look into the allegations.

I see someone left him trust for promoting a ponzi, and he stopped doing it.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

I would like to confirm that marcotheminer repaid the loan he has taken from me.

Payment Ref: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5116545.msg50015409#msg50015409

Repayment ref: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/3728f87c61c9800b7a1f2c4cb8cfbbece385cd0c693439a7936432ac627c8a70

In future I will happily help marcotheminer around slimier amount however I will suggest, please in future do not ask for another loan when you have an outstanding loan to pay. Asking for multiple loan really is very confusing for the community even if you have very good reputation. This also give pressure to the lender too. I hope you understand because once you were a lender too.

Anyway, I will request the community to remove any neg was given to him for this loan. I wanted to leave a positive feedback for you however I will leave you a neutral feedback with positive statement. May be in future I will change my feedback again.

[hacker1001101001]

Quickseller, marcotheminer, 2double0, and hacker1001101001 all seem to be entangled with each other in one way or another.  I'm not suggesting they are all linked accounts, I don't have any hard proof of that, but there several odd things that seem to suggest they may be under the control of the same person.

I think you have a pretty bad sense of finding alts or account connections. Nothing is common between me and all others you mentioned (Quickseller is the most odd part for me), aside of me funding a loan to 2double0, which I found legit as he proved the ownership of his old address to me and I trusted him. This is also confirmed by Avirunes by verifying my conversation here.

Instead of shilling this thread with fake connections, you could put your precious time in finding other solid forum spams.

Let me know if I am wrong.

You could be right OR could be wrong!  

It would only be cleared at the date of repayment of his previous loans.

As I said, you got a answer to your question from repayment. You could lock this thread now for avoiding fake assumptions as above.

I would like to confirm that marcotheminer repaid the loan he has taken from me.

Payment Ref: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5116545.msg50015409#msg50015409

Repayment ref: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/3728f87c61c9800b7a1f2c4cb8cfbbece385cd0c693439a7936432ac627c8a70

[shasan]

As I said, you got a answer to your question from repayment. You could lock this thread now for avoiding fake assumptions as above.

My question is/was regarding additional 0.3BTC. What we got from this post
1. Avoid possibility scam if got 0.3BTC
2. Stopped Ponzi promotion.
Why you are too much curious to lock the thread? Is it scam accusation? It is a topic for discussion. If you have faith then why you are not funding 0.3BTC?

[hacker1001101001]

My question is/was regarding additional 0.3BTC. What we got from this post
1. Avoid possibility scam if got 0.3BTC
2. Stopped Ponzi promotion.

I appreciate your efforts in, putting an end to a ponzi promotion made by a legendary member. Good job!

Why you are too much curious to lock the thread?

I have 0 curiosity in locking this thread, I just suggested a option to avoid unwanted accusations, against my name.

If you have faith then why you are not funding 0.3BTC?

I already said:

Note: I would personally go with not funding the loan, as I don't find the reason of getting a 3rd loan legit. But it does not mean he is sure to default the loan.

[shasan]

As 3rd loan has been locked, the first loan has been repaid and Ponzi promotion stopped, I am locking this thread. If I see more than one non-collateral loan request by Marco at the same time (I mean ask more loan while there is an active loan) then I will reopen this thread again.

[shasan]

Those people who advocate marco check this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5123782.0
And give your opinion on how trustworthy s/he is!!!
I have reopened this thread as s/he is trying to ask something which is inappropriate.

[marcotheminer]

Those people who advocate marco check this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5123782.0
And give your opinion on how trustworthy s/he is!!!
I have reopened this thread as s/he is trying to ask something which is inappropriate.

Inappropriate? It's completely appropriate, I'm making a loan request.

To the investor to CHECK ME, ASK ME, QUESTION ME. Done deal.

[Quickseller]

I have reopened this thread as s/he is trying to ask something which is inappropriate.

I don't think it is "inappropriate" to be asking for a loan, however the loan sizes are consistent with someone trying to pull an exit scam.

[marcotheminer]

I have reopened this thread as s/he is trying to ask something which is inappropriate.

I don't think it is "inappropriate" to be asking for a loan, however the loan sizes are consistent with someone trying to pull an exit scam.

It's the perception of forum. I understand it, I had the same view.

Wish there was some more I could do other than proofs and my word that I follow the plan that leads to revenue, but that's it for now.

Any real scammer would never go from 0.02-0.05 to 0.33 then 3000-5000 EUR. That's waving a flag saying don't lend to me.

That's how my events unfold though, so that's what I am requesting.

Right now: 3000-5000, 20 days repayment, all proof necessary and my word that I follow the plan (the only one that makes us money). Point a to Point b. Simple.