marcotheminer

[marcotheminer]

If I were to have tagged him for anything, it would be promoting a Ponzi in his sig space.

For promoting Ponzi on signature space Marco tagged by Suchmoon and other DT. But later they gave him a chance and all DT removed negative trust which has been given for promoting Ponzi.

Come to think of it, you're promoting a likely money laundering vessel. You're getting set pay.

Do I attack you personally for that? This is still Bitcoin. That arbitrage bot COULD still be real. Yeah, it's typically like HYIPs, but it shows proof I accept. DYOR.

===


NO LONGER SEEKING LOANS (1Month)
I received the expected 0.3BTC, so that's a month of income right there.

===









The only thread needed, let's quit the bullshit pun threads, drama threads, and on going stupidity. Rather, let's try to have a legitimate/civilised conversation.

I tried to take a 0.33 BTC loan: am I a scammer?
I was 1 week late on 2 loans: am I a scammer?
I "acted" suspicious (what does that even mean - everyone in Crypto acts suspicious one can argue): am I scammer?

I'll address all the questions you have. At the end of the day what I want is rectification of negative trust, in my opinion placed VERY prematurely and it came entirely following the rep. thread by Roman.

Let's use the forum as it's meant to be used, and avoid abusing the trust system based on your "feelings" or "suspicions" or "clairvoyance" or "scammer-finding-abilities".

I realise it'll take some time for me to be seen as trusted once again, but it's puzzling enough right? 1 week late on repayment and a larger-than-usual loan request and "change in my so-called behavior" = forum account destroyed.

We quickly see who is genuine and who is just on a power trip. So let's discuss, and let's try keeping biases at the door.

The trusts WERE warranted, yes. Though in my and some others' opinions (INCLUDING ROMAN) they aren't deserving of being permanent.

===

Negatives left by these members:
The Pharmacist: This member is proving himself to be untrustworthy as far as taking loans go, and I'll review this feedback if and when he pays back the loan from the reference thread.

marlboroza: Not repaying loan on time. Don't give this user no collateral loan.
 
mikeywith: pending loan , late for repayment , not his first time. do not lend him anything.
mikeywith (changed to neutral): this user is known for being late on loan repayment, long story short he is untrustworthy.
My comment to this change: A good change, thank you but still a bit over the top of a statement: "known for [...]" and "long story short [...]"..

suchmoon: Failing to repay a loan, again.

DireWolfM14: marcotheminer was twice late to repay loans, but it's his arrogance and deceit during the process that forces me to warn others about his behavior.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5116545.0;all

Lauda: Late to repay multiple loans among other things and tried to justify his behavior. Avoid lending to this user or dealing with him/her unless you want trouble.

===

Right. Let me add too: if my account stays as it is or if it reverts to how it was nothing really changes. People who trust me will continue to do so. People who only trust me because of a reputation number, will not deal with me (that was already the case from BadBear/Mitchell trusts). (hopefully these members begin to realise, this number is easily manipulated for BOTH good and for bad, and look through it onto more meaningful reputation metrics).

I will continue to use the forum for business/services/trades/lending/discussion/you name it; as I have done these past 6 years, a scammer tag won't change that and won't change my ability to successfully cooperate with other members.

That being said: it is still a pain and I would rather it not remain as it is, for the numerous reasons I've outlined.

[1715501537]

1715501537

[1715501537]

1715501537

[1715501537]

1715501537

[cabalism13]

As I have seen your Trust History, there were a lot of feedbacks regarding your trades, many of it has been made neutral ( in which only means they have forgiven you in the past and given you chances to redeem your self and reputation ) But as you have failed again with Roman, I think the Red Tag is appropriate, though I'm only against of many DTs tagging you. Maybe 2-3 DTs tagging you for the same reason is enough though.

Anyways, all in all, -ve will stay as it is, as for it is a warning for the lenders. No harsh feelings mate.

[shasan]

See all the topic regarding you. What you are thinking the same thing will people say in multiple places? Why you are not convincing on https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5122070.0

[The Cryptovator]

Multiple thread open against you about lent amount. I am suspecting you are doing same like Ponzi Scheme, just noticed from this thread. Its look like you are borrowing from someone and that amount using to repay your previous lender. Not is it? I can't see any other reason to ask multiple loan at the same time since you have active loan.

However, just imagine perhaps you are in personal problem and that's why you need loan. But really you are unable to handle lender. At least you should pay their interest amount in order to extend your loan duration or you have to convince anyhow. You repaid lent amount after get tag. Who know you will repay or not that's why DT's tag you since you had not convince lender during timeframe. So obviously you did wrong and which is consider untrustworthy activity. May be DT not removing your tag in order to warn community about your untrustworthy behaviour. Perhaps they could revise your feedback's later on or they will not, who know ?

Feedback's should remain at least for few days in my opinion. Repaid after get tag isn't prove that you are trustworthy.

[shasan]

Multiple thread open against you about lent amount. I am suspecting you are doing same like Ponzi Scheme, just noticed from this thread.

He is not only acting like a Ponzi scheme. He was a Ponzi promoter: https://archive.fo/yWXB7#selection-545.0-567.92 Last time he got negative trust and DT reconsider and gave him/her a chance.

[NeuroticFish]

am I scammer?

I guess that right now nobody knows for sure.
But if this is your real account you should know as good as I do that in this forum there are plenty of scammers and people are extremely wary right now, so a "better safe than sorry" strategy is to be expected.

[Roman1974]

First of all sorry for my english
Really i have diferents opinions on my head about marco.
Im really new on lending, but old on forum, and very old on online biz, where need see if scammers try to fuck me.
The true i have seeing lots of diferents ways of scam.
Most pay his debt in time, all perfect so his reputation its so good, obviously little debts, when have good reputation take bigger debts and dissapear ( most never answer).
But i see many that do the same but answer answer and answer but not pay again (strange why answer) but do it, perphas to win time and while your patient its here he continue scam.
When he unpaid me always had good comunication with me, so he always said i answer so ill not scam, for me its not sure will not scam for answer, as i explained.

Resuming i lived tons of difernts way of be for scam.

Sitting cold here what i see its that i send money to marco, that he pay late, but pay with good % and always answer me, so perphas had problems
 
Im really dont understand why someone can be so stupid, to prepare a bigger scam, and do this shit to fuck his account.

So if i see the facts, looks a good man with problems.

But in the other way, looks strange things, and now if i send him money again, why he will repay? his account its fact, and here on the forum with non collateral, in my opinion the ony small guarantee we have its not loose our good and old account.

I have been years as everybody can see on spanish section, now i started here, would like to say thx very much community for all your help.
in all i can ill help community too, as im some newbie on work on this forum i opened alerting when he not paid on time, to try just alert, thinking its good for all of us
thx again, and sorry again for my horrible english

[Thule]

Also the claim of exit scam leaks a bit.
He spents so many B on interrests of all his loans that the profit of an possible exit scam would be marginal in the longrun.

Multiple thread open against you about lent amount. I am suspecting you are doing same like Ponzi Scheme, just noticed from this thread. Its look like you are borrowing from someone and that amount using to repay your previous lender. Not is it? I can't see any other reason to ask multiple loan at the same time since you have active loan.

How does it come that at some members/websites you demand full proof to take actions and on some members you act on personal opinion with no proof at all.

[asche]

Dear all

I just read this thread with increasing interest.
While marco made a mistake, repaying late, and not handling the business professionally maybe the reaction is a bit harsh. Let's have a look at the facts:

• He repaid late
• He was difficult to contact for the lender
• The lender hasn't left him a negative
• The lender left him a positive rating

If we now compare the situation to a "traditional" market place like ebay or alike, it wouldn't be possible to leave a negative for the business handled by others.

The negatives he received are not wrong per so but some are a bit harsh and not as factual as they should in my opinion

This member is proving himself to be untrustworthy as far as taking loans go, and I'll review this feedback if and when he pays back the loan from the reference thread.

I would invite The Pharmacist to review his feedback and state that the repayment, while late was paid. Choosing Neutral or Red is of little importance.

Failing to repay a loan, again.

Why not be more specific and say it was a late repayment. With this feedback you will let people think he actually completely defaulted on the loan which he didn't (unless I missed something).

A fair warning is let potential lenders know he is often repaying late, but he actually is repaying (until now). Why overreach?
Going any further is doing harm he doesn't deserve in my opinion.

Posting a double here for reference, as the discussion seems to go on over here.

[Quickseller]

I think this is a good example as to why those who don’t participate in the marketplace have no business in the DT system.

[cryptohunter]

suchmoon is terrified of any kind of real debate

she deleted this for being "trolling" haha

========================================================================
He paid it back - with obscene interest albeit late.= neutral with warning " paid but late, perhaps stick to small loans sub 0.5 btc to be on the safe side"

I don't think it was cool to lose contact with the lender though at any point. That can be stressful. However, would anyone destroy a legend account for this tiny amount?

I mean you lend with no collateral then you will expect some stress now and then right? hence why you get insane interest.
========================================================================


Suchmoon willing to give those implicated in extortions  benefit of the doubt and even include them in her trust list lol

suchmoon willing to look the other with proven liars  includes them in her trust list

Suchmoon willing to promote and sanction the actions of those caught red handed racist trolling under puppet accounts to sig spam for extra btc dust includes them in her trust list

Suchmoon basically willing to give any "pals" a get out of jail free card for proven lying, scamming, greedy sneaky actions and trust abuse

suchmoron

[DireWolfM14]

suchmoon is terrified of any kind of real debate

Real debate, huh?  Just like your understanding of "facts?"  You wouldn't know a "real debate" if that was the name of a pit bull latched on to your ass. 

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I think this is a good example as to why those who don’t participate in the marketplace have no business in the DT system.

Who are you referring to, exactly?  And why is it you think someone who hasn't been involved in this particular marketplace on this particular forum is so inexperienced in life and/or trading that they're unable to notice someone stringing a lender along and acting in a reprehensible manner?  That is a ridiculously illogical conclusion, and it's nothing more than a veiled attempt to throw a pebble at the DT system.

<snip>

TL;DR

[cryptohunter]

suchmoon is terrified of any kind of real debate

Real debate, huh?  Just like your understanding of "facts?"  You wouldn't know a "real debate" if that was the name of a pit bull latched on to your ass.  

Dire posting Wolf boy again managing to

1. feltch suchmoon hoping for some merit scraps.
2. sig spam his "highly paid sig"
3. allow me to highlight this

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5118173.msg50066731#msg50066731

thanks come tell me more about these " opposite of facts"  lol

Back to flipping those burgers wolf boy.

[Thule]

Real debate, huh?  Just like your understanding of "facts?"  You wouldn't know a "real debate" if that was the name of a pit bull latched on to your ass.

Says an abuser and merit whore who posts false feedbacks.
But you know what i give you the chance to proof your negative feedback to be legit here

being called out as having an alt that was used to scam.

Please show me my alt which has scammed people on which i have been called out.

[marcotheminer]

I think this is a good example as to why those who don’t participate in the marketplace have no business in the DT system.

Perfect example, and it hasn't even been the first to come by..

[DireWolfM14]

Real debate, huh?  Just like your understanding of "facts?"  You wouldn't know a "real debate" if that was the name of a pit bull latched on to your ass.

Says an abuser and merit whore who posts false feedbacks.
But you know what i give you the chance to proof your negative feedback to be legit here

being called out as having an alt that was used to scam.

Please show me my alt which has scammed people on which i have been called out.

This one: ito-marketing.  Now read my words carefully.  I didn't say you attempted to scam, I said you retaliated for being called out as having an alt that used to scam.  You may argue that ito-marketing didn't attempt to scam anyone, but in my opinion attempted manipulation of the DT system is an attempt to scam. 

[bones261]

I think this is a good example as to why those who don’t participate in the marketplace have no business in the DT system.

Perfect example, and it hasn't even been the first to come by..

Meh, like our activity on Bitcointalk encompasses our whole life experience.  Whatever.

[marcotheminer]

--- 

Keep this to a relevant thread, thanks.

[Hhampuz]

What I can see you have a tag that says "Trade with extreme caution" and negative trust for being late on loans, I'm not seeing anything about you being a scammer? Unless you are saying that negatives are only for scammers? Sorry have not been involved in this so just trying to understand.

EDIT; I think most people that gave you negative are reasonable users that may remove or revise the rating at a later time. Although it's not been too long yet.

[Thule]

What I can see you have a tag that says "Trade with extreme caution" and negative trust for being late on loans, I'm not seeing anything about you being a scammer? Unless you are saying that negatives are only for scammers? Sorry have not been involved in this so just trying to understand.

EDIT; I think most people that gave you negative are reasonable users that may remove or revise the rating at a later time. Although it's not been too long yet.

When going to the trust page you can read at bottom

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

Also majority of forum users consider negative feedback with being a scammer which makes that all campaign managers disqualifies members with negative trust as its assicioted with scammers.

[marcotheminer]

What I can see you have a tag that says "Trade with extreme caution" and negative trust for being late on loans, I'm not seeing anything about you being a scammer? Unless you are saying that negatives are only for scammers? Sorry have not been involved in this so just trying to understand.

EDIT; I think most people that gave you negative are reasonable users that may remove or revise the rating at a later time. Although it's not been too long yet.

Right, the tags I received recently came from:

1. Being late on the 2nd loan I've ever been late on. Repaid fully, while maintaining contact with lender, as much assurance as I could provide - I gave.
2. "arrogance and deceit" - quite the scammer tag worthy statement

Note, I was late on 2 loans.. People make it seem like this has been going on for the past 4 months. No, they were 2 isolated and resolved events. So, the trust should be resolved too by now.

Overall, it's the fact that I didn't stick to the deadline. So people saw it as a perfect opportunity (following Roman's thread) to destroy my account. I have no scammed, nor will scam. I was late on 2 very short term loans in the past month. Perhaps next time, minimum duration will be a month to account for these things. I rather keep it short as the "best case", since best cases are the usual outcome.

[asche]

What I can see you have a tag that says "Trade with extreme caution" and negative trust for being late on loans, I'm not seeing anything about you being a scammer? Unless you are saying that negatives are only for scammers? Sorry have not been involved in this so just trying to understand.

EDIT; I think most people that gave you negative are reasonable users that may remove or revise the rating at a later time. Although it's not been too long yet.

What was mentioned is the "instruction" regarding when to leave a neg

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

So basically the argument of marco is that a red tag should be used only to expose scammers.

[marcotheminer]

Right. Let me add too: if my account stays as it is or if it reverts to how it was nothing really changes. People who trust me will continue to do so. People who only trust me because of a reputation number, will not deal with me (that was already the case from BadBear/Mitchell trusts). (hopefully these members begin to realise, this number is easily manipulated for BOTH good and for bad, and look through it onto more meaningful reputation metrics).

I will continue to use the forum for business/services/trades/lending/discussion/you name it; as I have done these past 6 years, a scammer tag won't change that and won't change my ability to successfully cooperate with other members.

That being said: it is still a pain and I would rather it not remain as it is, for the numerous reasons I've outlined.

[marlboroza]

Have you repaid old loans?

This is your address https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5113021.msg49863740#msg49863740

Part of wallet https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/013184bb1458a768/addresses

http://archive.is/Xj5R0 2double0 ^[1]
http://archive.is/dgJ6L MegaHuslr
http://archive.is/uf3md bitkilo
http://archive.is/mEHc0 deborameeks
http://archive.is/Pp0Er howzar
http://archive.is/TAEHd Mondy
http://archive.is/YveGk Mobo
ETC.

Lutpin connected several accounts with howzar few years ago:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1206112.msg13605820#msg13605820
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1206112.msg13605983#msg13605983
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1206112.msg13613499#msg13613499

Seems like loan scammer. You don't know anything about this, don't you?  

---------------------------------

If anyone has time to go through this wallet there are possible more accounts (probably sold/default/whatever).

[1] Well, this is funny:



That account used address which is part of marcotheminer's wallet  

[DarkStar_]

http://archive.is/uf3md bitkilo

Where did the bitkilo connection come from?

[suchmoon]

http://archive.is/uf3md bitkilo

Where did the bitkilo connection come from?

https://archive.fo/uf3md#selection-6531.0-6531.29 (look in the list, can't link directly)

[marlboroza]

http://archive.is/uf3md bitkilo

Where did the bitkilo connection come from?

Well...

Hi lightlord, could you please change my payment address, i have also sent you a PM about this.
Thank you.

And this is marcotheminer's addy

http://archive.is/uf3md#selection-6663.0-6663.161 (scroll up and check table)

Unless they used marcotheminer's address in signature campaign to repay loan, but that doesn't make sense because marcotheminer posted this:

Repaid late, but repaid! Thanks.

https://blockchain.info/tx/145e60f1c3d801b8f82656d72dd114a160f7652f332640e4a5963edeb415d9f8

https://blockchain.info/tx/72f670a9c71c39d03d13c9ce62d8d22e7176f3e07e1cde5a79537e80be8ed0aa

Repayment came from 17eDS4zwUvd3whq6ep46NRN4gVegQ8JuFM which is bitkilo's address https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1161170.msg18700229#msg18700229

I am really confused. That loan should have been repaid a month before this transaction.

[shasan]

I suspected 2double0 was linked with marco (archived)
Marco gave a loan to 2double0 but they didn't keep that record. I have also created a post where I thought 2double0 might be a scammer.
Quickseller also thought they are using by the same owner, see his/her topic on reputation board.

[Quickseller]

I think this is a good example as to why those who don’t participate in the marketplace have no business in the DT system.

Who are you referring to, exactly?  And why is it you think someone who hasn't been involved in this particular marketplace on this particular forum is so inexperienced in life and/or trading that they're unable to notice someone stringing a lender along and acting in a reprehensible manner?  That is a ridiculously illogical conclusion, and it's nothing more than a veiled attempt to throw a pebble at the DT system.

I am referring to anyone who doesn't regularly trade, or who has not previously traded extensively.

My concern is not about being qualified to hand out ratings, my concern is about the lack of self governance. The most active DT members have never traded (or have seldom traded) in the marketplace, and have not been selected to be on DT by anyone with any kind of substantial trading history in the forum marketplace, and as such, their judgment as to when (or when not) to leave a particular rating does not represent the consensus (nor the will) of those who will use the DT system in any substantial way.  Instead, ratings, or lack thereof has more to do with the person is a member of a clique of a small group of people.

I am not sure if you are aware, but the original term of the loan was supposed to be for one week, with ~13% interest, instead, the loan was repaid 17 days, and approximately 66% interest was paid. 5x the agreed amount of interest was paid in exchange for the loan lasting approximately 2.43x it should have.

The additional ratings he received are all generally saying he needs to offer collateral to take out additional loans, but none of these people are lenders, nor borrowers, so those who left the ratings are not "protecting" their customers or trading partners, which is often the case for those who like to hand out lots of ratings.

[marcotheminer]

I suspected 2double0 was linked with marco (archived)
Marco gave a loan to 2double0 but they didn't keep that record. I have also created a post where I thought 2double0 might be a scammer.
Quickseller also thought they are using by the same owner, see his/her topic on reputation board.

2double0 is not my account, it is not used by me, I do not own/use it. How many times do I need to say this?

Have you repaid old loans?

This is your address https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5113021.msg49863740#msg49863740

Part of wallet https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/013184bb1458a768/addresses

http://archive.is/Xj5R0 2double0 ^[1]
http://archive.is/dgJ6L MegaHuslr
http://archive.is/uf3md bitkilo
http://archive.is/mEHc0 deborameeks
http://archive.is/Pp0Er howzar
http://archive.is/TAEHd Mondy
http://archive.is/YveGk Mobo
ETC.

Lutpin connected several accounts with howzar few years ago:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1206112.msg13605820#msg13605820
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1206112.msg13605983#msg13605983
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1206112.msg13613499#msg13613499

Seems like loan scammer. You don't know anything about this, don't you? 

---------------------------------

If anyone has time to go through this wallet there are possible more accounts (probably sold/default/whatever).

[1] Well, this is funny:



That account used address which is part of marcotheminer's wallet 

Ah this again. I have NO outstanding debts ANYWHERE. Connect all the accounts/addresses you want: I use marcotheminer, it is my forum account. Whatever links I've had to other accounts are long irrelevant.

And please: What "old loans"

I think this is a good example as to why those who don’t participate in the marketplace have no business in the DT system.

Who are you referring to, exactly?  And why is it you think someone who hasn't been involved in this particular marketplace on this particular forum is so inexperienced in life and/or trading that they're unable to notice someone stringing a lender along and acting in a reprehensible manner?  That is a ridiculously illogical conclusion, and it's nothing more than a veiled attempt to throw a pebble at the DT system.

I am referring to anyone who doesn't regularly trade, or who has not previously traded extensively.

My concern is not about being qualified to hand out ratings, my concern is about the lack of self governance. The most active DT members have never traded (or have seldom traded) in the marketplace, and have not been selected to be on DT by anyone with any kind of substantial trading history in the forum marketplace, and as such, their judgment as to when (or when not) to leave a particular rating does not represent the consensus (nor the will) of those who will use the DT system in any substantial way.  Instead, ratings, or lack thereof has more to do with the person is a member of a clique of a small group of people.

I am not sure if you are aware, but the original term of the loan was supposed to be for one week, with ~13% interest, instead, the loan was repaid 17 days, and approximately 66% interest was paid. 5x the agreed amount of interest was paid in exchange for the loan lasting approximately 2.43x it should have.

The additional ratings he received are all generally saying he needs to offer collateral to take out additional loans, but none of these people are lenders, nor borrowers, so those who left the ratings are not "protecting" their customers or trading partners, which is often the case for those who like to hand out lots of ratings.

In general agreement with what you've said.

May I add too: piggy-backing on others' trusts is a sure way of showing a member doesn't think for themselves. If they jump on the negative-trust bandwagon, they're just wanting to flex some power or something probably. Because by that point adding an extra negative trust adds nothing of value to making others aware of the negative-trusted user's actions (obviously, unless they were +100 in the green).

[mdayonliner]

You guys are very good at painting users. Always keen to find an issue in others. You are helping the community?

This guy may be late to pay but he repaid the lender with extra amount as late fees. One of the lender panicked so he created a topic. And you lot just ruined everything for this user?

After your red tag this guy could deny repayment. Who would suffer then? The OP of course, coz he would lost his money. Good thing that this guys did not do that.

Where were you guys when hilariousandco did not remove cloudbet's name from his CL prize pool topic while there were a big scam accusations of 330 BTC was open. It was resolved later but wasn't it obvious if I or any other user would do the same then your lot would red paint them?

You would not mass with hilariousandco because he has the same power or to some extend more influence then you all lot have.

[nutildah]

If I were to have tagged him for anything, it would be promoting a Ponzi in his sig space.



It was definitely a Ponzi or else straight up scam. There's no room for debate with silly promises like these:



However, I am of the opinion that once somebody has been tagged for something, there is no reason to add another tag for the same thing. I've been trying to give them out sparingly.

[shasan]

If I were to have tagged him for anything, it would be promoting a Ponzi in his sig space.

For promoting Ponzi on signature space Marco tagged by Suchmoon and other DT. But later they gave him a chance and all DT removed negative trust which has been given for promoting Ponzi.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I am not sure if you are aware, but the original term of the loan was supposed to be for one week, with ~13% interest, instead, the loan was repaid 17 days, and approximately 66% interest was paid.

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but marcotheminer had the lender anxious enough that he started a scam accusation thread, and the extra interest was only added once marcotheminer had been negged and pressured to pay the guy back. 

You still haven't said who you're talking about, because I'm 100% sure you have specific members in mind that for some reason you won't share.  If you're talking about me, please tell me how I'm unable to empathize with the lender in this case because of the hard time marcotheminer was giving him.  How much experience is enough?  Please tell me, I'm dying to know what your standards are.

You guys are very good at painting users. Always keen to find an issue in others. You are helping the community?

There was a very clear issue here, and it wasn't something someone had to go digging for.  It's also disheartening how your attitude has changed since you received that neg for trying to escrow $100k.  Hopefully you can see that this isn't malicious, just as hilariousandco's neg on you wasn't malicious.  We're dealing with the internet, anonymous people, and an irreversible form of currency.  This is the only way to keep the community clean, especially when no one goes to the authorities when they get scammed.

[bones261]

You guys are very good at painting users. Always keen to find an issue in others. You are helping the community?

This guy may be late to pay but he repaid the lender with extra amount as late fees. One of the lender panicked so he created a topic. And you lot just ruined everything for this user?

After your red tag this guy could deny repayment. Who would suffer then? The OP of course, coz he would lost his money. Good thing that this guys did not do that.

     How long do you recommend we wait to tag someone for being late on a short term loan? Especially when the lender starts a thread bringing up their concerns? It appears 10 days late on a loan that's only supposed to be a week is not sufficient grace for some people around here. Should DT sit on their hands for 30 days? 60 Days? 90 days? Indefinitely? Also, if DT spots the same account trying to get another loan while another is late, should DT sit on their hands?
    The only reason that I am not adding another negative trust comment to marcotheminer's trust page is because I do agree with LoyceV that this probably has more than enough redundancy at this point.
    Also, if someone is denying payment because DT started red tagging them for being late, that is untrustworthy behavior. In the end, I'm glad marcotheminer made everyone whole plus penalty and interest. However, in the future, it appears when marcotheminer is negotiating terms, he needs to learn to under-promise and over-deliver. As a bill collector, there is nothing more irritating than constantly getting "call me tomorrow, and I will pay," or "the check is in the mail." If they must be late, I would prefer that they just tell me a week or even a month (and make good) so I don't have to keep following up.

[LoyceV]

The additional ratings he received are all generally saying he needs to offer collateral to take out additional loans, but none of these people are lenders, nor borrowers, so those who left the ratings are not "protecting" their customers or trading partners, which is often the case for those who like to hand out lots of ratings.

I see no need to be protecting only a certain category of people. When I tag an account, it's meant to protect anyone.

[Quickseller]

The additional ratings he received are all generally saying he needs to offer collateral to take out additional loans, but none of these people are lenders, nor borrowers, so those who left the ratings are not "protecting" their customers or trading partners, which is often the case for those who like to hand out lots of ratings.

I see no need to be protecting only a certain category of people. When I tag an account, it's meant to protect anyone.

If I am not going to trade with person x regardless of their trust rating, you tagging person x is not going to protect me because it will not change anything. On the other hand, if I am considering buying widgets and you tag person x who sells widgets, then I would be protected (to the extent I am willing to listen to your warning) if you tag him for being a scammer. If you also sell and/or trade widgets, then you would want person x to be tagged if he is a scammer because if he scams a bunch of widget buyers, the marketplace could get a reputation that it isn’t safe to buy widgets, scarring potential buyers away.

You may not limit your tags to widget scammers in the above example because a scammer who sells hammers might scare away potential widget buyers and otherwise give the marketplace a reputation where people mostly get scammed, or the victim of a scam attempt.

In the same example, if you tag people unfairly who trade hammers, the marketplace might get a reputation for not being fair and potential widget buyers might not want to use the marketplace to buy widgets, hurting your business. Also some people might be afraid to do business with you if you tag people unfairly.

[marcotheminer]

If I were to have tagged him for anything, it would be promoting a Ponzi in his sig space.

For promoting Ponzi on signature space Marco tagged by Suchmoon and other DT. But later they gave him a chance and all DT removed negative trust which has been given for promoting Ponzi.

Come to think of it, you're promoting a likely money laundering vessel. You're getting set pay.

Do I attack you personally for that? This is still Bitcoin. That arbitrage bot COULD still be real. Yeah, it's typically like HYIPs, but it shows proof I accept. DYOR.

===


NO LONGER SEEKING LOANS (1Month)
I received the expected 0.3BTC, so that's a month of income right there.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I fucked up 2 small loans - no a big deal in my books.

This is part of the problem, the fact that you can't see this from anybody else's viewpoint other than your own.  It may not seem like a big deal to you, but you weren't the one wondering if you were going to ever see your money again or whether the borrower was just stringing you along with false promises.

Also, I think bones was asking a rhetorical question when he asked how long DT members should wait before tagging someone for repaying a loan late, and it certainly isn't a question that you ought to be answering.  In fact, seeing as how the only thing your input has gotten you is more red trust, you might want to just remain quiet.  You are definitely not helping yourself with your words.

[marcotheminer]

?

You guys are very good at painting users. Always keen to find an issue in others. You are helping the community?

This guy may be late to pay but he repaid the lender with extra amount as late fees. One of the lender panicked so he created a topic. And you lot just ruined everything for this user?

After your red tag this guy could deny repayment. Who would suffer then? The OP of course, coz he would lost his money. Good thing that this guys did not do that.

     How long do you recommend we wait to tag someone for being late on a short term loan? Especially when the lender starts a thread bringing up their concerns? It appears 10 days late on a loan that's only supposed to be a week is not sufficient grace for some people around here. Should DT sit on their hands for 30 days? 60 Days? 90 days? Indefinitely? Also, if DT spots the same account trying to get another loan while another is late, should DT sit on their hands?
    The only reason that I am not adding another negative trust comment to marcotheminer's trust page is because I do agree with LoyceV that this probably has more than enough redundancy at this point.
    Also, if someone is denying payment because DT started red tagging them for being late, that is untrustworthy behavior. In the end, I'm glad marcotheminer made everyone whole plus penalty and interest. However, in the future, it appears when marcotheminer is negotiating terms, he needs to learn to under-promise and over-deliver. As a bill collector, there is nothing more irritating than constantly getting "call me tomorrow, and I will pay," or "the check is in the mail." If they must be late, I would prefer that they just tell me a week or even a month (and make good) so I don't have to keep following up.

By 7 days in, the lender was calmed by my PROOF to him. That Thursday he has SOLID reassurance he would be paid ASAP. And I even got income before I expected today (0.3BTC).

I would say wait 2 weeks. That's scam territory. Some borrowers straight up disappear for 10-12 days easily.

Every other situation I've had I under promise and over deliver. I fucked up 2 small loans - no a big deal in my books.

[marcotheminer]

I fucked up 2 small loans - no a big deal in my books.

This is part of the problem, the fact that you can't see this from anybody else's viewpoint other than your own.  It may not seem like a big deal to you, but you weren't the one wondering if you were going to ever see your money again or whether the borrower was just stringing you along with false promises.

Also, I think bones was asking a rhetorical question when he asked how long DT members should wait before tagging someone for repaying a loan late, and it certainly isn't a question that you ought to be answering.  In fact, seeing as how the only thing your input has gotten you is more red trust, you might want to just remain quiet.  You are definitely not helping yourself with your words.

He was SATISFIED BEFORE I paid him, do you see this? I could have satisfied him the DAY I was late, but I had made "quick promises" stupidly rather than wait the day and make a sure call and say look I need 7days more, so and so will happen, here's my plan and progress.

The day it was due I had my backup income opportunity - the one I was sure of by Friday and shared with Roman (he can confirm this).

==

Understand my words and you'll see where I'm coming from. I do business, things get done. Yeah, these things happen. But my mistakes, I agree fully don't need to repeat.

[hilariousetc]

Are we sure this is the original marcotheminer? I've only skimmed the thread but he was pretty inactive from about 2016 and has only really recently started up again, especially with the loans. Has a signed message been provide from some old addresses?

You guys are very good at painting users. Always keen to find an issue in others. You are helping the community?

This guy may be late to pay but he repaid the lender with extra amount as late fees. One of the lender panicked so he created a topic. And you lot just ruined everything for this user?

After your red tag this guy could deny repayment. Who would suffer then? The OP of course, coz he would lost his money. Good thing that this guys did not do that.

Where were you guys when hilariousandco did not remove cloudbet's name from his CL prize pool topic while there were a big scam accusations of 330 BTC was open. It was resolved later but wasn't it obvious if I or any other user would do the same then your lot would red paint them?

You would not mass with hilariousandco because he has the same power or to some extend more influence then you all lot have.

Jeeze, you really do have a hard-on for me. It was really fun for me to sit back and watch you run around desperately trying to get people to tag me merely for not removing the word 'Cloudbet' from the premier league pool when all the shenanigans was going on. You should read what you've just written a few times because I actually find great irony and hypocrisy in this post as you seriously contradict yourself. I'll explain why. You yourself were quick to want Cloudbet be painted with negative feedback and I think one of the main reasons why was because you knew I was running a Cloudbet-sponsored pool so that would be one avenue you could use to beat off to in an attempt to try 'get' me. I followed the situation closely but unlike the lynch mob I wasn't ready to throw them under the bus straight away because I thought there was a good chance the scam accuser was either lying or there was something fishy going on and it certainly wasn't apparent what was actually happening or that Cloubet were doing something dodgy nor did I feel like me running a pool merely with the word 'Cloudbet' in front of it was going to do much damage in this situation even if the worst turned out to be true, but I was waiting for all the facts, unlike you who wanted them painted red asap because it was in your interests to. In fact, it later transpired that Cloudbet was doing the good thing by delaying payment because they could see something fishy was going on and didn't add up right and someone else was trying to claim the money and that was later admitted by the original claimant and rightful owner of the money. If you had gotten your way and Cloudbet panicked and acquiesced to the demands of the red-painting lynch mob and just immediately sent the money back to the person who asked for it so the community didn't turn against them and ruin their rep forever then he would have likely run off with it and that would have been ok for you because chop chop, it had to be instant even though you didn't know all the facts. Imagine if that had happened and a scammer got all that money just because they didn't want their reputation ruined by the baying mob here hungry for blood instead of waiting for all the facts and research to have been done to make sure the money was actually going to the right person. What would have happened then. Would you have been rallying for them to send another 330 btc to the rightful owner? You were thinking with your dick and you should wait for the facts first before you blow your load, especially when all you really wanted from the situation was it diverted on to me.

[marcotheminer]

Are we sure this is the original marcotheminer? I've only skimmed the thread but he was pretty inactive from about 2016 and has only really recently started up again, especially with the loans. Has a signed message been provide from some old addresses?

Yes, since day 0 until now. Signed address has been given several times since returning to active mode.

[LoyceV]

Yes, since day 0 until now. Signed address has been given several times since returning to active mode.

To be thorough: can you give a link to a signed message and staked address? And since accounts are often sold including staked address, it will be much more convincing if you sign from a non-empty staked address.

[bones261]

NO LONGER SEEKING LOANS (1Month)
I received the expected 0.3BTC, so that's a month of income right there.

Well, it appears that plan changed. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5123782.0

[marcotheminer]

NO LONGER SEEKING LOANS (1Month)
I received the expected 0.3BTC, so that's a month of income right there.

Well, it appears that plan changed. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5123782.0

A hasty call on my part: I realise there's no point in calling things like that. Here is an opportunity for 5,000 eur in 20 days.

Again, serious investors will have the peace of mind they need. Trust me, I was and still am a serious investor when I have cash.

Yes, since day 0 until now. Signed address has been given several times since returning to active mode.

To be thorough: can you give a link to a signed message and staked address? And since accounts are often sold including staked address, it will be much more convincing if you sign from a non-empty staked address.

Yes, you can find it in my old loan threads. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg11077414#msg11077414

& Please, stop with the "exit scam" possibility. It's fun to have some drama where someone might run off with $5000eur, but it's peanuts. This is legitimate revenue generation. Those with real interest/ability to invest, will ask the right questions - and soon realise if they are wasting their time or soon to make money.

Honestly can't say much more than that, all the proof I need I have.

[LoyceV]

NO LONGER SEEKING LOANS (1Month)
I received the expected 0.3BTC, so that's a month of income right there.

Well, it appears that plan changed. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5123782.0

It smells more and more like an exit scam.

Yes, since day 0 until now. Signed address has been given several times since returning to active mode.

To be thorough: can you give a link to a signed message and staked address? And since accounts are often sold including staked address, it will be much more convincing if you sign from a non-empty staked address.

Yes, you can find it in my old loan threads. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg11077414#msg11077414

I see an address, no signature. For what it's worth, I have no reason to believe you bought the account. I didn't interact with you before.

& Please, stop with the "exit scam" possibility.

If you stop asking for bigger and bigger loans, I'll stop thinking you're planning an exit scam.

It's fun to have some drama where someone might run off with $5000eur, but it's peanuts. This is legitimate revenue generation.

I love it when people claim the loan they need is "peanuts". That may be true for some people, but the fact is you don't have this "peanut" amount, which makes it much more than "peanuts" for you.

Those with real interest/ability to invest, will ask the right questions - and soon realise if they are wasting their time or soon to make money.

I'd say open a topic and post all the details

[marcotheminer]

NO LONGER SEEKING LOANS (1Month)
I received the expected 0.3BTC, so that's a month of income right there.

Well, it appears that plan changed. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5123782.0

It smells more and more like an exit scam.

Yes, since day 0 until now. Signed address has been given several times since returning to active mode.

To be thorough: can you give a link to a signed message and staked address? And since accounts are often sold including staked address, it will be much more convincing if you sign from a non-empty staked address.

Yes, you can find it in my old loan threads. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg11077414#msg11077414

I see an address, no signature. For what it's worth, I have no reason to believe you bought the account. I didn't interact with you before.

& Please, stop with the "exit scam" possibility.

If you stop asking for bigger and bigger loans, I'll stop thinking you're planning an exit scam.

It's fun to have some drama where someone might run off with $5000eur, but it's peanuts. This is legitimate revenue generation.

I love it when people claim the loan they need is "peanuts". That may be true for some people, but the fact is you don't have this "peanut" amount, which makes it much more than "peanuts" for you.

Those with real interest/ability to invest, will ask the right questions - and soon realise if they are wasting their time or soon to make money.

I'd say open a topic and post all the details

Smell some coffee beans to reset your palette.

No but seriously, I'm not asking for bigger and bigger loans. I asked for 0.02 then 0.05 then 0.03 once. All small scale similar online operations. I can't convince you to make income, so I seek people who show business interest.

Post all the details? So that when they're out there you and 50 other members can crowd the income out? No thanks - there's a reason this space is profitable: it is inefficient. We don't share all information (yet), income opportunities like this must be protected, especially since they are short term.

"Peanuts" is the way one sees something. I don't have "peanuts" but I realise 5,000 eur truly is a drop in the bucket. I was dealing with these amounts in 2014-2016, many times holding it for companies and other users.

==

There's another reason maybe for the negativity.

Many of the people speaking of me now never actually had any interactions with me. I've been here since end of 2013, the people who know me will trust me. Newer people or newly met people rather, will take some time to "show you how I operate". I successfully ran the biggest campaigns here, I worked with massive companies for their campaigns.

[nutildah]

NO LONGER SEEKING LOANS (1Month)
I received the expected 0.3BTC, so that's a month of income right there.

Well that ended pretty quickly:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5123782.0

You were no longer seeking loans for 1 month for 1 day.

No but seriously, I'm not asking for bigger and bigger loans.

I would say 3,000 - 5,000 euros definitely counts as "bigger."

[marcotheminer]

NO LONGER SEEKING LOANS (1Month)
I received the expected 0.3BTC, so that's a month of income right there.

Well that ended pretty quickly:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5123782.0

You were no longer seeking loans for 1 month for 1 day.

I received the 0.3, placed where needed and kept around half as liquid.

I am working with 400 eur, when 3000-5000 eur is ideal (for this opportunity).

I thought that opportunity was one-off, but turns out it continues, except slightly bigger/longer lasting. Hence the loan. I can pass on this opportunity (as I said, month of income). BUT why not earn more if it involves reinvest just a portion of previous earnings?

[suchmoon]

Just go to a bank and tell them this story you're telling us. I mean it's all so credible you should have no problem getting a 5000 EUR loan.

[marcotheminer]

Just go to a bank and tell them this story you're telling us. I mean it's all so credible you should have no problem getting a 5000 EUR loan.

Bitcoin is the end of banks. Why? because this is possible. Banks would ask for collateral, they are legacy systems. They wouldn't even know what I'm proposing. Here, people have knowledge of the field.

[nutildah]

Just go to a bank and tell them this story you're telling us. I mean it's all so credible you should have no problem getting a 5000 EUR loan.

Bitcoin is the end of banks. Why? because this is possible. Banks would ask for collateral, they are legacy systems. They wouldn't even know what I'm proposing. Here, people have knowledge of the field.

We don't even know what you're proposing because you won't tell anybody, unless they are a "serious investor." How can somebody even consider being a serious investor if they don't know what they are investing in?

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Well that ended pretty quickly:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5123782.0

All he's gotten in that thread so far are comments voicing skepticism, and rightfully so--this is why the red trust should stand, so that others can see his history.

It'll be interesting to see if he gets that loan.  The main problem is that he sees no problem gambling with other people's money, and in addition he outright refuses to offer collateral.  If that isn't sketchy from a red-trusted member, I don't know what is.  He also thinks other people can read his mind and his intentions, which obviously no one can.  That's why collateral is a must for loans, especially with bitcoin.  If he decides to not repay the loan, the lender basically has zero recourse.

[suchmoon]

Just go to a bank and tell them this story you're telling us. I mean it's all so credible you should have no problem getting a 5000 EUR loan.

Bitcoin is the end of banks. Why? because this is possible. Banks would ask for collateral, they are legacy systems. They wouldn't even know what I'm proposing. Here, people have knowledge of the field.

Hint: "people" here are saying that you're full of shit.

You're either in some shithole where 5000 EUR is enough to disappear with or you're so broke IRL that you don't even have a credit card with a 5k limit. Either case, nobody should lend you any money, as if that hasn't been abundantly clear for some time now.

[Hhampuz]

I've seen a few projects pop up that are similar to bitconnect.. Are these the kind of investments you are making marco?

[marcotheminer]

Well that ended pretty quickly:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5123782.0

All he's gotten in that thread so far are comments voicing skepticism, and rightfully so--this is why the red trust should stand, so that others can see his history.

It'll be interesting to see if he gets that loan.  The main problem is that he sees no problem gambling with other people's money, and in addition he outright refuses to offer collateral.  If that isn't sketchy from a red-trusted member, I don't know what is.  He also thinks other people can read his mind and his intentions, which obviously no one can.  That's why collateral is a must for loans, especially with bitcoin.  If he decides to not repay the loan, the lender basically has zero recourse.

Stop. Making. Assumptions. Jesus.

I don't use cards (I don't even have a prepaid one), I prefer not even use my bank if I can avoid it.

I've seen a few projects pop up that are similar to bitconnect.. Are these the kind of investments you are making marco?

No. It is on a reputable exchange site.

We don't even know what you're proposing because you won't tell anybody, unless they are a "serious investor." How can somebody even consider being a serious investor if they don't know what they are investing in?

Ok, if you have 10 BTC in your wallet. Many people do. And you see who I am (through the b.s. of recent) then you reach out to me. You say: look here is how I operate, here's what I need. Boom, everyone is on same page and we work as a team, updates, etc as they come (daily in this instance).
No. It is on a reputable exchange site.

Just go to a bank and tell them this story you're telling us. I mean it's all so credible you should have no problem getting a 5000 EUR loan.

Bitcoin is the end of banks. Why? because this is possible. Banks would ask for collateral, they are legacy systems. They wouldn't even know what I'm proposing. Here, people have knowledge of the field.

Hint: "people" here are saying that you're full of shit.

You're either in some shithole where 5000 EUR is enough to disappear with or you're so broke IRL that you don't even have a credit card with a 5k limit. Either case, nobody should lend you any money, as if that hasn't been abundantly clear for some time now.

Read my signature.

[Quickseller]

Are we sure this is the original marcotheminer? I've only skimmed the thread but he was pretty inactive from about 2016 and has only really recently started up again, especially with the loans. Has a signed message been provide from some old addresses?

Yes, he signed a message here that included the date. Also he has had multiple loans funded to that address.

Yes, since day 0 until now. Signed address has been given several times since returning to active mode.

To be thorough: can you give a link to a signed message and staked address? And since accounts are often sold including staked address, it will be much more convincing if you sign from a non-empty staked address.

This is a pretty good argument to not go in 'guns blazing' tagging every sold account because, according to threads I have seen in Auctions, both email addresses and private keys are being sold with accounts, making it very difficult, if not impossible to tell when an account has changed hands.

Just go to a bank and tell them this story you're telling us. I mean it's all so credible you should have no problem getting a 5000 EUR loan.

Bitcoin is the end of banks. Why? because this is possible. Banks would ask for collateral, they are legacy systems. They wouldn't even know what I'm proposing. Here, people have knowledge of the field.

I am not sure if you have heard of a credit card, but that is an example of banks giving no collateral loans. Banks also give no collateral signature loans all the time, on much better terms than you are proposing. Banks will generally want to document a potential borrowers' ability to repay (usually based on their income) before giving this kind of loan

[marcotheminer]

I don't have a credit card. I am ready to pay higher interest to secure it P2P online (I will make enough to cover it + some).

[bones261]

This is a pretty good argument to not go in 'guns blazing' tagging every sold account because, according to threads I have seen in Auctions, both email addresses and private keys are being sold with accounts, making it very difficult, if not impossible to tell when an account has changed hands.

Maybe we should start asking suspect accounts to fund the private key and leave it there for a week. 

[Quickseller]

This is a pretty good argument to not go in 'guns blazing' tagging every sold account because, according to threads I have seen in Auctions, both email addresses and private keys are being sold with accounts, making it very difficult, if not impossible to tell when an account has changed hands.

Maybe we should start asking suspect accounts to fund the private key and leave it there for a week. 

I don't think there is any basis for telling people they must hold money in bitcoin in order to maintain their reputation.

[bones261]

This is a pretty good argument to not go in 'guns blazing' tagging every sold account because, according to threads I have seen in Auctions, both email addresses and private keys are being sold with accounts, making it very difficult, if not impossible to tell when an account has changed hands.

Maybe we should start asking suspect accounts to fund the private key and leave it there for a week.  

I don't think there is any basis for telling people they must hold money in bitcoin in order to maintain their reputation.

Well, I can't wait for the day that someone buys an account with a private key and then the seller recovers their account back, leaving the buyer high and dry.  The seller may even get lucky and be able to recover the e-mail account too.

[Quickseller]

This is a pretty good argument to not go in 'guns blazing' tagging every sold account because, according to threads I have seen in Auctions, both email addresses and private keys are being sold with accounts, making it very difficult, if not impossible to tell when an account has changed hands.

Maybe we should start asking suspect accounts to fund the private key and leave it there for a week. 

I don't think there is any basis for telling people they must hold money in bitcoin in order to maintain their reputation.

Well, I can't wait for the day that someone buys an account with a private key and then the seller recovers their account back, leaving the buyer high and dry.  The seller may even get lucky and be able to recover the e-mail account too.
[img height=150 ]https://media.giphy.com/media/pUeXcg80cO8I8/giphy.gif[/img]

It is interesting to see that you are hoping that a certain group of people will get scammed.

This has been noted.

[marcotheminer]

This is a pretty good argument to not go in 'guns blazing' tagging every sold account because, according to threads I have seen in Auctions, both email addresses and private keys are being sold with accounts, making it very difficult, if not impossible to tell when an account has changed hands.

Maybe we should start asking suspect accounts to fund the private key and leave it there for a week. 

I don't think there is any basis for telling people they must hold money in bitcoin in order to maintain their reputation.

Well, I can't wait for the day that someone buys an account with a private key and then the seller recovers their account back, leaving the buyer high and dry.  The seller may even get lucky and be able to recover the e-mail account too.

It's happened to me with collateral. The user had "his account stolen", that's probable but it's also probable he just claimed that.

[bones261]

This is a pretty good argument to not go in 'guns blazing' tagging every sold account because, according to threads I have seen in Auctions, both email addresses and private keys are being sold with accounts, making it very difficult, if not impossible to tell when an account has changed hands.

Maybe we should start asking suspect accounts to fund the private key and leave it there for a week. 

I don't think there is any basis for telling people they must hold money in bitcoin in order to maintain their reputation.

Well, I can't wait for the day that someone buys an account with a private key and then the seller recovers their account back, leaving the buyer high and dry.  The seller may even get lucky and be able to recover the e-mail account too.

It's happened to me with collateral. The user had "his account stolen", that's probable but it's also probable he just claimed that.

Well, if the debtor ended up paying paid the loan, then (s)he was probably truthful. However, if they didn't pay, then I'd consider it equivalent to "the dog ate my homework" excuse.

[hilariousetc]

This is a pretty good argument to not go in 'guns blazing' tagging every sold account because, according to threads I have seen in Auctions, both email addresses and private keys are being sold with accounts, making it very difficult, if not impossible to tell when an account has changed hands.

Sadly a signed message isn't definitive proof these days, but it's better than nothing, especially as not being able to provide one is a huge giveaway (though not exactly definitive in itself either).

Well, I can't wait for the day that someone buys an account with a private key and then the seller recovers their account back, leaving the buyer high and dry.  The seller may even get lucky and be able to recover the e-mail account too.
[img height=150 ]https://media.giphy.com/media/pUeXcg80cO8I8/giphy.gif[/img]

It is interesting to see that you are hoping that a certain group of people will get scammed.

This has been noted.

I don't think he wants this to happen but this is obviously just a way to test the validity of that address. If someone else owns it then that user would be very reluctant to send money to it as the chances the money would disappear would be very high, though obviously he was being factitious, but I suppose you could say it was the users fault if he did in fact lose his money this way.

[marcotheminer]

This is a pretty good argument to not go in 'guns blazing' tagging every sold account because, according to threads I have seen in Auctions, both email addresses and private keys are being sold with accounts, making it very difficult, if not impossible to tell when an account has changed hands.

Sadly a signed message isn't definitive proof these days, but it's better than nothing, especially as not being able to provide one is a huge giveaway (though not exactly definitive in itself either).

Well, I can't wait for the day that someone buys an account with a private key and then the seller recovers their account back, leaving the buyer high and dry.  The seller may even get lucky and be able to recover the e-mail account too.
[img height=150 ]https://media.giphy.com/media/pUeXcg80cO8I8/giphy.gif[/img]

It is interesting to see that you are hoping that a certain group of people will get scammed.

This has been noted.

I don't think he wants this to happen but this is obviously just a way to test the validity of that address. If someone else owns it then that user would be very reluctant to send money to it as the chances the money would disappear would be very high, though obviously he was being factitious, but I suppose you could say it was the users fault if he did in fact lose his money this way.

Yeah, nearly everything can be circumvented which is why basing shit on feelings and comparison works even less.