Bill gator - Account Buyer

[Lauda]

I do understand where you coming from, so thats why I leave it open at the moment and will look into more, but for the moment i'm leaning more to opposite for my feeling at the moment...

Safest thing in this system is to neither oppose nor support. If you support anything you risk getting blacklisted. If you oppose anything, you risk drama. Personally, I've excluded everyone who opposed it and reported everyone who broke local rules. You can track exclusions in this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5098579.

Edit: Also what kind of trades are considered not worthless?, I think the persons I have handled with they can say I honour my word and its not really worthless imo

All feedback left quickly and for miniscule amounts is worthless. This constitutes most feedback left in that section, especially on people like bill.

[1714923444]

1714923444

[1714923444]

1714923444

[1714923444]

1714923444

[1714923444]

1714923444

[eddie13]

Surprised you excluded The Pharmacist.. I'll oppose because I believe it is the correct thing to do, and you can't exclude me..

[Lauda]

Surprised you excluded The Pharmacist..

No nepotism, unlike the super-majority of this forum (including those that would never admit to it).

Personally, I've excluded everyone who opposed it and reported everyone who broke local rules.

It doesn't matter who the opposing party is. Everyone gets the same treatment. You've shown that you have a very flawed judgement a very long time ago, nothing new.

[philipma1957]

He did buy his account but I don't remember reading anything about him being an account seller.

Wrong title then and I oppose your opposition obviously.

Lauda, you know I respect you but you'll have to oppose my opposition to bill gator's flag as well.  I've done business with him and never felt I was at risk of losing money.  He's not a scammer, even if he bought his account.  He's even a nice guy, for chrissakes.  He doesn't deserve that flag.  Many, many other members do, but not bill gator. 

Kisses, sweet cat.

At Lauda I have yet to vote for or against bill gator.

But he has done business with me.  In such a way that I trusted him.

he hosted gear for me for a while and could robbed the gear he did not. I would not have been able to be repaid so he was trustworthy with around 500 usd in gear.

I know he purchased an account  and this is now considered a very bad thing to do.  But years ago it was not a bad offense.

If he purchased an account and scammed with it I would agree with you.

So basically I think he is not the worst most untrustworthy guy.

I hate forum politics and I did not want to vote here. I still don't want to vote. 

I will clearly explain why I don't want to vote.
 I know bill gator's name I know where he lives


For the record

 bill gator never stole from me
 bill gator purchased the account years ago  when it did not mean  neg trust
 bill gator did not steal from me when he had a chance to steal

SO I won't vote against him.

the issue here is not bill gator

 it is why were accounts allowed to be sold. and are still allowed to be sold. without a sold tag

it seems to me if you allow sold accounts and simply mark them as purchased it is enough to say account was sold on x date.

if you find an account was sold on the sneak and not marked as purchased it is a flag.

Making it a flag on a sold account would be much more correct if it was hidden
not making it a flag on a sold account would be much more correct.

a simple account sold on mm/dd/yy  would end the entire issue

[Lauda]

But he has done business with me. 

Oh, I've heard about this. Many others probably too.

it is why were accounts allowed to be sold. and are still allowed to be sold. without a sold tag

The issue stems from stubborn misplaced, damaging liberalism - theymos. If it hasn't been changed so far, despite the countless complaints, it won't be changed anytime soon IMO.

[philipma1957]

But he has done business with me. 

Oh, I've heard about this. Many others probably too.

it is why were accounts allowed to be sold. and are still allowed to be sold. without a sold tag

The issue stems from stubborn misplaced, damaging liberalism - theymos. If it hasn't been changed so far, despite the countless complaints, it won't be changed anytime soon IMO.

yes this is why I won't vote on this.

I really think the simple solution is to mark a sold account as sold.
Or risk red tags if hiding the account.

As for doing business it is a double edged sword.  Some sales to some people don't reveal much about the person.

But in bill's case I know his real name and real address  this is worthwhile info and helps for trusting a person.

I do see why you are pushing the issue as we both agree on the idea in bold type.

Hopefully it gets sorted out.

[Lauda]

yes this is why I won't vote on this.

I really think the simple solution is to mark a sold account as sold.
Or risk red tags if hiding the account.

As for doing business it is a double edged sword.  Some sales to some people don't reveal much about the person.

But in bill's case I know his real name and real address  this is worthwhile info and helps for trusting a person.

I do see why you are pushing the issue as we both agree on the idea in bold type.

Hopefully it gets sorted out.

I already told bill the start of the solution to his problem: new, publicly-admitted, alt account. Lock down and stop using the bought account. This is the best way to remedy the situation, whilst keeping the buying accounts is terrible policy consistent. If a user is legitimate, they will have absolutely no trouble re-proving their worth.

[philipma1957]

yes this is why I won't vote on this.

I really think the simple solution is to mark a sold account as sold.
Or risk red tags if hiding the account.

As for doing business it is a double edged sword.  Some sales to some people don't reveal much about the person.

But in bill's case I know his real name and real address  this is worthwhile info and helps for trusting a person.

I do see why you are pushing the issue as we both agree on the idea in bold type.

Hopefully it gets sorted out.

I already told bill the start of the solution to his problem: new, publicly-admitted, alt account. Lock down and stop using the bought account. This is the best way to remedy the situation, whilst keeping the buying accounts is terrible policy consistent. If a user is legitimate, they will have absolutely no trouble re-proving their worth.

well you are offering a solution

@ bill  can't you reach out and try to fix this lauda does have a solution here that could work.

I hate to see this kind of infighting as there are some real scumbags here on BCTalk and better members fighting amongst ourselves is not the way to go.

Since the energy spent here could be used against  others that truly deserve .

Bill if you lock the purchased account down you can refer to it and to this thread not as a "Lauda and bitcointalk fucked me concept"  but as a way to show the dangers of sold accounts.   Maybe thyrmos (sp)   would alter policy and simply mark all sold accounts as sold on DD//DD

we all could go back to looking after the scammers and not infight.

I am trying to broker a solution that the older longtime people here think works.

I for one
would offer to help you start a new account because it would show you do have the ability to work with others.

This is all I got.

[Lauda]

well you are offering a solution

@ bill  can't you reach out and try to fix this lauda does have a solution here that could work.

I've fixed the local rule that the accused party (even though none of my threads created today are accusations!) can respond.

I hate to see this kind of infighting as there are some real scumbags here on BCTalk and better members fighting amongst ourselves is not the way to go.

Since the energy spent here could be used against  others that truly deserve .

Bill if you lock the purchased account down you can refer to it and to this thread not as a "Lauda and bitcointalk fucked me concept"  but as a way to show the dangers of sold accounts.   Maybe thyrmos (sp)   would alter policy and simply mark all sold accounts as sold on DD//DD

I believe that being fully transparent regarding the account purchase (from who, who escrowed, etc.) would also contribute a lot. I can't, by any means, force anyone to produce or give up this information.

[El duderino_]

I do understand where you coming from, so thats why I leave it open at the moment and will look into more, but for the moment i'm leaning more to opposite for my feeling at the moment...

All feedback left quickly and for miniscule amounts is worthless. This constitutes most feedback left in that section, especially on people like bill.

Indeed but like I bought 10-15 items few little more expensive, dropped all at MJ's been there for longer as a month, whiteout I have to worry imo what is quiet nice, then he send me everything at once, so obviously I give him good trust good comment and all, I post pics of what I received but I never put down the amount of cost cause I just don't know anymore how much it was.... so when you gonna check with me, then its not accurate but still its about some BTC's and I think more are not always writing numbers, maybe for personal reasons, opsec or whatever.
It still didn't take away Bill did numerous of trades whiteout scamming anyone, and let's be honest he only enjoys he's good trading cause he isn't red tagged, now with big red taggs's that all felt away whiteout him doing a single bad trade or whatever....


So I do understand people to forgive and move on like how it was last years... (some could give neutral trust and write account bought with date of when)---> with that info members can decide if they yes or not handle with that person in question.

[Lauda]

I do understand where you coming from, so thats why I leave it open at the moment and will look into more, but for the moment i'm leaning more to opposite for my feeling at the moment...

All feedback left quickly and for miniscule amounts is worthless. This constitutes most feedback left in that section, especially on people like bill.

Indeed but like I bought 10-15 items few little more expensive, dropped all at MJ's been there for longer as a month, whiteout I have to worry imo what is quiet nice, then he send me everything at once, so obviously I give him good trust good comment and all, I post pics of what I received but I never put down the amount of cost cause I just don't know anymore how much it was.... so when you gonna check with me, then its not accurate but still its about some BTC's and I think more are not always writing numbers, maybe for personal reasons, opsec or whatever.

MJ is a special case. I sometimes even forget I have stuff there. That's how much you can trust him.

[TECSHARE]

yes this is why I won't vote on this.

I really think the simple solution is to mark a sold account as sold.
Or risk red tags if hiding the account.

As for doing business it is a double edged sword.  Some sales to some people don't reveal much about the person.

But in bill's case I know his real name and real address  this is worthwhile info and helps for trusting a person.

I do see why you are pushing the issue as we both agree on the idea in bold type.

Hopefully it gets sorted out.

I already told bill the start of the solution to his problem: new, publicly-admitted, alt account. Lock down and stop using the bought account. This is the best way to remedy the situation, whilst keeping the buying accounts is terrible policy consistent. If a user is legitimate, they will have absolutely no trouble re-proving their worth.

well you are offering a solution

@ bill  can't you reach out and try to fix this lauda does have a solution here that could work.

I hate to see this kind of infighting as there are some real scumbags here on BCTalk and better members fighting amongst ourselves is not the way to go.

Since the energy spent here could be used against  others that truly deserve .

Bill if you lock the purchased account down you can refer to it and to this thread not as a "Lauda and bitcointalk fucked me concept"  but as a way to show the dangers of sold accounts.   Maybe thyrmos (sp)   would alter policy and simply mark all sold accounts as sold on DD//DD

we all could go back to looking after the scammers and not infight.

I am trying to broker a solution that the older longtime people here think works.

I for one
would offer to help you start a new account because it would show you do have the ability to work with others.

This is all I got.

OOOOoor, Bill Gator can continue to live his life without bowing to every dictate Lauda demands as if they are some kind of lord over the entire forum, and Lauda can just deal with the loss of their dictatorial control like an adult.

[El duderino_]

I do understand where you coming from, so thats why I leave it open at the moment and will look into more, but for the moment i'm leaning more to opposite for my feeling at the moment...

All feedback left quickly and for miniscule amounts is worthless. This constitutes most feedback left in that section, especially on people like bill.

Indeed but like I bought 10-15 items few little more expensive, dropped all at MJ's been there for longer as a month, whiteout I have to worry imo what is quiet nice, then he send me everything at once, so obviously I give him good trust good comment and all, I post pics of what I received but I never put down the amount of cost cause I just don't know anymore how much it was.... so when you gonna check with me, then its not accurate but still its about some BTC's and I think more are not always writing numbers, maybe for personal reasons, opsec or whatever.

MJ is a special case. I sometimes even forget I have stuff there. That's how much you can trust him.

Had the same with bitcoinpenny and also felt good 

But still I mean I never wrote down nr's of BTC-worth amounts, so its not the only thing to look at... I know I handled for good size of 'money worth' but you could see it as pennies or less cause its not really been written down and always left open...