Flagging accounts which are up to sale [DT member actions needed]

[bob123]

I decided to use some spare time to get some accounts - which are up to sale - flagged.


I found 2 threads claiming to sell forum accounts:

1) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5155184.0 (archived link): User 'SeW900'
2) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5139800.0 (archived link): User 'Rueduciel'

Both of them contained their telegram ID, so i just went ahead and contacted both of them.


1)
The accounts provided by 'SeW900'  (or better: @TrustedAccSeller on telegram) were:

• cicizhang  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=935809)
• TanClan98 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1045919)
• zackie (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=99997) [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]
• Zedster (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=78317) [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]
• Ntrain2k https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]
• nonnakip https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=69046
• narousberg https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=61971 [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]
• pant-79 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=203430

According to him, some of them (the first and/or the second one) are already banned.
However, the remaining ones - which he wanted to sell - are not banned yet.


2)
The accounts provided by Rueduciel were:

• J Gambler (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=821674)
• fitty (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=25298) [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]

I asked both of them to send me (user: alice321, just created today to receive those messages) a proof that they indeed own that account.


1)
After requesting proof of ownership of cicizhang and TanClan98 from SeW900, he told me that 'the account' already is banned.
Therefore he proposed me 2 other accounts, which i can buy (zackie and Zedster).

He told me to contact @TrustedAccSeller (via telegram), which i did.


After a long conversation with him and multiple excuses i brought up to not buy an account which he had proven the ownership of (because i wanted to tag as much accounts as possible), i finally got the proof of ownership of multiple accounts and names of a few accounts without proof of ownership.

The accounts proven to be for sale and owned by him (zackie, Zedster, Ntrain2k and narousberg) should definitely receive a negative trust rating.
I am not sure about the accounts without proof (cicizhang, TanClan98, nonnakip and pant-79). I'll let some DT member decide how to handle this.




2)
Rueduciel offered me J Gambler.But he did not send me a proof for ownership because he noticed that this account already is reserved for some other buyer.
Therefore he proposed me the account fitty, which he proved that he indeed has control over this account via a PM.

But now i really wanted to also have his first account (J Gambler) to be flagged too. I asked him whether i can have this account if i additionally pay 50$ on top (not like 400$ aren't enough already).
He agreed.

Unfortunately i made a big mistake by leaving him a negative trust rating BEFORE contacting, paired with my sense of humor regarding the chosen username, which interfered my plan. He came to the conclusion that my alt (alice321) is related to me (bob123).


While it is not proven that J Gambler is really under control of him, i still believe that he indeed wants to sell this account.
I am not sure about leaving a negative trust rating on this account, therefore i will let the DT members decide how to handle this.

fitty definitely should receive a negative trust rating.


Screenshots of the chat history:

• 1) with SeW900 ('Walter' on telegram): https://i.imgur.com/7lTjZxs.jpg
  
  • with @TrustedAccSeller (telegram):
  • • part 1
    • part 2
• 2) with Rueduciel ('Mara Mae' on telegram): https://i.imgur.com/dt4l4KX.jpg

Screenshot of my received PMs: here and here.



I have sent a negative trust rating to fitty, zackie, Zedster, Ntrain2k and narousberg.
Now i need a few (at least 1) DT member to also leave a negative trust rating.

Especially for Ntrain2k, since he has 6 positive trust feedbacks.

No one should trust an account which is up to sale. Especially not Hero / Legendary ones and some with a positive trust rating.

[1714805336]

1714805336

[1714805336]

1714805336

[1714805336]

1714805336

[Findingnemo]

Better to be in Reputation section.

All these might be hacked accounts as well,so need to check if someone claiming the ownership soon.

[AdolfinWolf]

Damn. A+ for effort. That's some hardcore detective work. Here i was thinking Legendary/Hero account sellers were a myth by now.

OP of the first link you posted has already deleted his post so I can't know If you are telling the truth or not now.

Seems like he already did so, at least for the messages where they're stating it's them selling accounts.

All these might be hacked accounts as well,so need to check if someone claiming the ownership soon.

What i was thinking. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 is most definitely a hacked account.
This one also just suddenly stopped posting in russian.. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=61971;sa=showPosts;start=0
This one too, and way more obvious. Literally every post is in russian right up until somewhere in 2018, where it suddenly switches to english only. Definitely sold or maybe hacked? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=203430;sa=showPosts;start=300

Even then, i highly doubt the original owner will come back for them in most cases.

[mindrust]

OP of the first link you posted has already deleted his post so I can't know If you are telling the truth or not now.

Seems like he already did so, at least for the messages where they're stating it's them selling accounts.

My bad. Checking his evidences before I send red trust.

(let's say) I red trusted this guy for example but there is a problem.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659

How do I know If this isn't a game to make these accounts get red trust?

The account is suspicious as fuck with no merits, only 2 posts in 2018. But how can I be sure?

[bob123]

(let's say) I red trusted this guy for example but there is a problem.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659

How do I know If this isn't a game to make these accounts get red trust?

The account is suspicious as fuck with no merits, only 2 posts in 2018. But how can I be sure?

1. I was speaking to an account seller
2. He offered to sell this account
3. He proved that he indeed owns this account.


I understand this concern regarding the other accounts (where i didn't get any proof about the ownership)
I mean.. i could say "i sell account 'theymos' for 1 BTC'.. without proof you can't be sure.

But in this case i strongly believe this is evidence enough 
What exact scenario are you insecure about ? How can this be a game if the owner of the account took part in it ?

[LoyceV]

How do I know If this isn't a game to make these accounts get red trust?

The account is suspicious as fuck with no merits, only 2 posts in 2018. But how can I be sure?

Maybe bob123 can give you access to his throwaway account alice321 to verify the posts if you don't believe the screenshots.

[mindrust]

What exact scenario are you insecure about ? How can this be a game if the owner of the account took part in it ?

I am selling your account for 2btc.

This is basically what he was doing. That's the part which confused me exactly.

I guess in this situation It comes down to that If I trust YOU or not.

[TMAN]

@op can you provide some proof of the telegram convo please.

Edit. Specifically the conversation with 'SeW900'  (or better: @TrustedAccSeller

[AdolfinWolf]

I am selling your account for 2btc.

This is basically what he was doing. That's the part which confused me exactly.

I guess in this situation It comes down to that If I trust YOU or not.

Which is why bob123 asked the account seller to send them a message from said account they supposedly had for sale, right?

>>https://imgur.com/if7k5iX

Or do you not trust/want to take bob's word for it in this situation?

[bob123]

What exact scenario are you insecure about ? How can this be a game if the owner of the account took part in it ?

~snip~

I am selling your account for 2btc.

This is basically what he was doing. That's the part which confused me exactly.

I guess in this situation It comes down to that If I trust YOU or not.

Not exactly.

If a buyer now wants you to proof that you own the account and you send a message from my account.. then this is what happened.
If you just claim you sell this account without any proof of ownership, this is far away from what happened.

Maybe bob123 can give you access to his throwaway account alice321 to verify the posts if you don't believe the screenshots.

Absolutely, not a problem at all.

I can give any (trusted) member the credentials to log in and verify.

@op can you provide some proof of the telegram convo please.

Edit. Specifically the conversation with 'SeW900'  (or better: @TrustedAccSeller

As far as i understood SeW900 is not @TrustedAccSeller, but a friend of him.
SeW900 is 'Walter' and 'his friend' (the person who sells the accounts) is @TrustedAccSeller.


All conversations can be seen in the screenshots i uploaded:

[...]
Screenshots of the chat history:

• 1) with SeW900 ('Walter' on telegram): https://i.imgur.com/7lTjZxs.jpg
  
  • with @TrustedAccSeller (telegram):
  • • part 1
    • part 2
• 2) with Rueduciel ('Mara Mae' on telegram): https://i.imgur.com/dt4l4KX.jpg

Screenshot of my received PMs: here and here.

[mindrust]

I am selling your account for 2btc.

This is basically what he was doing. That's the part which confused me exactly.

I guess in this situation It comes down to that If I trust YOU or not.

Which is why bob123 asked the account seller to send them a message from said account they supposedly had for sale, right?

>>https://imgur.com/if7k5iX

Or do you not trust/want to take bob's word for it in this situation?

Didn't see that one. Now it is all clear. Was celebrating $11k gotten a bit clumsy. 

[bob123]

I am selling your account for 2btc.

This is basically what he was doing. That's the part which confused me exactly.

I guess in this situation It comes down to that If I trust YOU or not.

Which is why bob123 asked the account seller to send them a message from said account they supposedly had for sale, right?

>>https://imgur.com/if7k5iX

Or do you not trust/want to take bob's word for it in this situation?

Didn't see that one. Now it is all clear. Was celebrating $11k gotten a bit clumsy. 

That's by the way also the reason i have [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller] behind some of the accounts.
These are all the accounts which i received a message from after demanding a proof that they really own the account.

Those who don't have the tag behind them, have been mentioned as up to sale by the seller, but didn't give me proof of ownership in form of a message.

1)
The accounts provided by 'SeW900'  (or better: @TrustedAccSeller on telegram) were:

• cicizhang  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=935809)
• TanClan98 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1045919)
• zackie (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=99997) [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]
• Zedster (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=78317) [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]
• Ntrain2k https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]
• nonnakip https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=69046
• narousberg https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=61971 [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]
• pant-79 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=203430

According to him, some of them (the first and/or the second one) are already banned.
However, the remaining ones - which he wanted to sell - are not banned yet.


2)
The accounts provided by Rueduciel were:

• J Gambler (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=821674)
• fitty (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=25298) [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]

[otrkid1970]

selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.

[mindrust]

selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.

It is not a crime.

You'll just have to live with a red trust rating shining on your forehead.

It shouldn't be a problem for anybody to start as a newbie. Why would anyone want to buy a green trust legendary account anyway? There is only one explanation which makes sense: to Scam people.

[Quickseller]

zackie (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=99997) [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]
Zedster (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=78317) [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]
Ntrain2k https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]
narousberg https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=61971 [Proven that the account is really up to sale and owned by the seller]

These are the only ones that are proven to be up for sale, but only to the extent the PMs can be proven.

I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him.

If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid.

[otrkid1970]

selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.

It is not a crime.

You'll just have to live with a red trust rating shining on your forehead.

Are you threatening me with a baseless accusation trust rating?

[mindrust]

selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.

It is not a crime.

You'll just have to live with a red trust rating shining on your forehead.

Are you threatening me with a baseless accusation trust rating?

How did you get that idea?

I don't make threats. I do it right away.

[otrkid1970]

selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.

It is not a crime.

You'll just have to live with a red trust rating shining on your forehead.

Are you threatening me with a baseless accusation trust rating?

How did you get that idea?

You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account?  you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.

[mindrust]

selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.

It is not a crime.

You'll just have to live with a red trust rating shining on your forehead.

Are you threatening me with a baseless accusation trust rating?

How did you get that idea?

You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account?  you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.

Signature campaigns don't want bought accounts farmed by one person. (they clearly state that you'll get banned if you were found to multiaccount spamming) They want real individuals. So your argument is invalid.

[otrkid1970]

selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.

It is not a crime.

You'll just have to live with a red trust rating shining on your forehead.

Are you threatening me with a baseless accusation trust rating?

How did you get that idea?

You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account?  you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.

Signature campaigns don't want bought accounts farmed by one person. (they clearly state that you'll get banned if you were found to multiaccount spamming) They want real individuals. So your argument is invalid.

you cant tell if an account is bought.  you're an idiot.

[mindrust]

selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.

It is not a crime.

You'll just have to live with a red trust rating shining on your forehead.

Are you threatening me with a baseless accusation trust rating?

How did you get that idea?

You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account?  you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.

Signature campaigns don't want bought accounts farmed by one person. (they clearly state that you'll get banned if you were found to multiaccount spamming) They want real individuals. So your argument is invalid.

you cant tell if an account is bought.  you're an idiot.

I just did it for 5 accounts in this topic.

[otrkid1970]

selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.

It is not a crime.

You'll just have to live with a red trust rating shining on your forehead.

Are you threatening me with a baseless accusation trust rating?

How did you get that idea?

You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account?  you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.

Signature campaigns don't want bought accounts farmed by one person. (they clearly state that you'll get banned if you were found to multiaccount spamming) They want real individuals. So your argument is invalid.

you cant tell if an account is bought.  you're an idiot.

I just did it for 5 accounts in this topic.

You're too quick witted for me....i think you deserve a spot in the DT list with those other ass clowns.

[AdolfinWolf]

You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account?  you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.

And you think that's healthy for the forum?

I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him.

If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid.

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

Although, i hate people who moral high horse others, and these account sellers damn well know what they're doing.

you cant tell if an account is bought.  you're an idiot.

You most definitely can & what exactly is your problem?

[otrkid1970]

You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account?  you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.

And you think that's healthy for the forum?

I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him.

If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid.

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

Although, i hate people who moral high horse, and these account sellers damn well know what they're doing.

you cant tell if an account is bought.  you're an idiot.

You most definitely can & what exactly is your problem?

Account sales according to the rulles of this website are NOT prohibited. Flagging these accounts is abuse of the trust system. Case closed.

[mindrust]

I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him.

If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid.

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

I kinda agree with quickseller but since I am not the one who shared those PM's I don't care.

It is OP's problem.

[AdolfinWolf]

You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account?  you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.

And you think that's healthy for the forum?

I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him.

If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid.

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

Although, i hate people who moral high horse, and these account sellers damn well know what they're doing.

you cant tell if an account is bought.  you're an idiot.

You most definitely can & what exactly is your problem?

Account sales according to the rulles of this website are NOT prohibited. Flagging these accounts is abuse of the trust system. Case closed.

Scamming is also not prohibited as per the unofficial official forum rules... Is flagging scammers also abuse of the "trust" system?

[mindrust]

Account sales according to the rulles of this website are NOT prohibited. Flagging these accounts is abuse of the trust system. Case closed.

No flags here as far as I see. Only ratings.

Even though you can create yellow flags which is appropriate.

[otrkid1970]

You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account?  you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.

And you think that's healthy for the forum?

I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him.

If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid.

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

Although, i hate people who moral high horse, and these account sellers damn well know what they're doing.

you cant tell if an account is bought.  you're an idiot.

You most definitely can & what exactly is your problem?

Account sales according to the rulles of this website are NOT prohibited. Flagging these accounts is abuse of the trust system. Case closed.

Scamming is also not prohibited... Is flagging scammers also abuse of the "trust" system?

You're comparing apples and oranges. Scammers make a user lose Value. Buying an account to join a sig campaign has no victims. your point is moot. Next?

[bob123]

You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account?  you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.

Signature campaigns don't want bought accounts farmed by one person. (they clearly state that you'll get banned if you were found to multiaccount spamming) They want real individuals. So your argument is invalid.

you cant tell if an account is bought.  you're an idiot.

So.. just because it is hard to tell whether an account has been bought.. it is ok to do something which is not permitted by the signature campaign managers.. just to join such a campaign ?  
So.. if i am not getting caught.. i can rob a bank ?

You're too quick witted for me....i think you deserve a spot in the DT list with those other ass clowns.

He is a member of the DT1 list. Or is this some joke i don't understand?

I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him.

If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid.

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

I kinda agree with quickseller but since I am not the one who shared those PM's I don't care.

It is OP's problem.

I wouldn't call that scam.
It definitely would have been a scam if i took those accounts (he offered me to send credentials first) and not pay him afterwards.

But just accepting a deal and later rescinding does not fall under the scam-category IMO.

Unethical? Yes.
Unfair? Yes.
Mean and misleading? Yes.

But scamming? Definitely no, IMO

Account sales according to the rulles of this website are NOT prohibited. Flagging these accounts is abuse of the trust system. Case closed.

It is not.

People behind bought accounts are NOT to be trusted.. simply because they didn't earn any trust or acceptance in this forum.
They bought an account which did.. So tagging them as what they are (simply just bought accounts, no value behind it) is not an abuse of the trust system.

[mindrust]

I wouldn't call that scam.
It definitely would have been a scam if i took those accounts (he offered me to send credentials first) and not pay him afterwards.

But just accepting a deal and later rescinding does not fall under the Scam-category IMO.

Unethical? Yes.
Unfair? Yes.
Mean? Yes.

Where did you read I said you did a scam?

I just agreed to it was unethical.

Nothing else.

edit:

Is everybody high tonight?

[otrkid1970]

You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account?  you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.

Signature campaigns don't want bought accounts farmed by one person. (they clearly state that you'll get banned if you were found to multiaccount spamming) They want real individuals. So your argument is invalid.

you cant tell if an account is bought.  you're an idiot.

So.. just because it is hard to tell whether an account has been bought.. it is ok to do something which is not permitted by the signature campaign managers.. just to join such a campaign ?  
So.. if i am not getting caught.. i can rob a bank ?

You're too quick witted for me....i think you deserve a spot in the DT list with those other ass clowns.

He is a member of the DT1 list. Or is this some joke i don't understand?

I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him.

If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid.

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

I kinda agree with quickseller but since I am not the one who shared those PM's I don't care.

It is OP's problem.

I wouldn't call that scam.
It definitely would have been a scam if i took those accounts (he offered me to send credentials first) and not pay him afterwards.

But just accepting a deal and later rescinding does not fall under the Scam-category IMO.

Unethical? Yes.
Unfair? Yes.
Mean? Yes.

But scamming? Definitely no, IMO

Account sales according to the rulles of this website are NOT prohibited. Flagging these accounts is abuse of the trust system. Case closed.

It is not.

People behind bought accounts are NOT to be trusted.. simply because they didn't earn any trust or acceptance in this forum.
They bought an account which did.. So tagging them as what they are (simply just bought accounts, no value behind it) is not an abuse of the trust system.

Selling an account is not a reason for mistrust.   get a grip and go chase other ambulances.   You a lawyer?

[AdolfinWolf]

You're comparing apples and oranges. Scammers make a user lose Value. Buying an account to join a sig campaign has no victims. your point is moot. Next?

too bad you can't put a price tag on someone's mental health deteriorating due to the amount of garbage he has to consume from these people who buy accounts and post detritus.

[bob123]

Where did you read I said you did a scam?

I just agreed to it was unethical.

Nothing else.

Not replying to you here, but to AdolfinWolf:

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

mindrust, i think you celebrated the rise of BTC/USD a bit too much already  

[mindrust]

mindrust, i think you celebrated the rise of BTC/USD a bit too much already  

Alright I did my job, I am going away. Cheers.

[otrkid1970]

You're comparing apples and oranges. Scammers make a user lose Value. Buying an account to join a sig campaign has no victims. your point is moot. Next?

too bad you can't put a price tag on someone's mental health deteriorating due to the amount of garbage he has to consume from these people who buy accounts and post detritus.

Your username says it all smh

[suchmoon]

These are the only ones that are proven to be up for sale, but only to the extent the PMs can be proven.

I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him.

If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid.

It wouldn't. Alice/bob didn't agree to pay for merely disclosing the account names, and that's all that happened. He offered to pay for an account, which he didn't end up getting.

According to your "logic" any kind of price/deal negotiation would be a flaggable breach of contract, which is of course utter nonsense. If I say "I'll pay $50 for your bicycle" and change my mind upon seeing said bicycle I'm not breaching your imaginary contract.

[Quickseller]

I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him.

If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid.

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

I kinda agree with quickseller but since I am not the one who shared those PM's I don't care.

It is OP's problem.

I wouldn't call that scam.
It definitely would have been a scam if i took those accounts (he offered me to send credentials first) and not pay him afterwards.

But just accepting a deal and later rescinding does not fall under the scam-category IMO.

Unethical? Yes.
Unfair? Yes.
Mean and misleading? Yes.

But scamming? Definitely no, IMO

When you said you would buy the account after he provides confidential information, you entered into a contract with him. The terms of the contract were he was to send you a PM from the account he was selling (exposing confidential information to you), you would pay him 550 and he would give you the account. After receiving the confidential information, you did not follow through on your end of the contract, and the person suffered damages in the form of decreased value of what he is selling as a direct result of your actions.

The term "scam" is very subjective, but there was a written contract, the terms were violated (assuming you can not demonstrate you upheld your end of the deal), and he suffered damages. This is the criteria for a written contract flag. It is up to the person to create a flag.

These are the only ones that are proven to be up for sale, but only to the extent the PMs can be proven.

I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him.

If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid.

It wouldn't. Alice/bob didn't agree to pay for merely disclosing the account names, and that's all that happened. He offered to pay for an account, which he didn't end up getting.

According to your "logic" any kind of price/deal negotiation would be a flaggable breach of contract, which is of course utter nonsense. If I say "I'll pay $50 for your bicycle" and change my mind upon seeing said bicycle I'm not breaching your imaginary contract.

You are wrong, as per usual.

There is no requirement to see what is being sold in order for a contract to be valid. The OP made an offer that was accepted by the other party once he fulfilled his part of the contract.

If you want to look at what you are buying before being obligated to buy said item, you should not make an offer before seeing it.

[mindrust]

I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him.

If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid.

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

I kinda agree with quickseller but since I am not the one who shared those PM's I don't care.

It is OP's problem.

I wouldn't call that scam.
It definitely would have been a scam if i took those accounts (he offered me to send credentials first) and not pay him afterwards.

But just accepting a deal and later rescinding does not fall under the scam-category IMO.

Unethical? Yes.
Unfair? Yes.
Mean and misleading? Yes.

But scamming? Definitely no, IMO

When you said you would buy the account after he provides confidential information, you entered into a contract with him. The terms of the contract were he was to send you a PM from the account he was selling (exposing confidential information to you), you would pay him 550 and he would give you the account. After receiving the confidential information, you did not follow through on your end of the contract, and the person suffered damages in the form of decreased value of what he is selling as a direct result of your actions.

The term "scam" is very subjective, but there was a written contract, the terms were violated (assuming you can not demonstrate you upheld your end of the deal), and he suffered damages. This is the criteria for a written contract flag. It is up to the person to create a flag.

Holy crap.

Theymos what did you do...

[otrkid1970]

I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him.

If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid.

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

I kinda agree with quickseller but since I am not the one who shared those PM's I don't care.

It is OP's problem.

I wouldn't call that scam.
It definitely would have been a scam if i took those accounts (he offered me to send credentials first) and not pay him afterwards.

But just accepting a deal and later rescinding does not fall under the scam-category IMO.

Unethical? Yes.
Unfair? Yes.
Mean and misleading? Yes.

But scamming? Definitely no, IMO

When you said you would buy the account after he provides confidential information, you entered into a contract with him. The terms of the contract were he was to send you a PM from the account he was selling (exposing confidential information to you), you would pay him 550 and he would give you the account. After receiving the confidential information, you did not follow through on your end of the contract, and the person suffered damages in the form of decreased value of what he is selling as a direct result of your actions.

The term "scam" is very subjective, but there was a written contract, the terms were violated (assuming you can not demonstrate you upheld your end of the deal), and he suffered damages. This is the criteria for a written contract flag. It is up to the person to create a flag.

It's called an oral contract which he broke.

[bob123]

[..] After receiving the confidential information, you did not follow through on your end of the contract, and the person suffered damages in the form of decreased value of what he is selling as a direct result of your actions.
[...]

What the hell?

How did my expection to receive an PM to get the proof of ownership decrease the value of what he is selling?

I didn't know accounts lose value for each PM sent... But that's probably because i don't buy/sell accounts..

[marlboroza]

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

Sting operations are always double edged sword.

[otrkid1970]

[..] After receiving the confidential information, you did not follow through on your end of the contract, and the person suffered damages in the form of decreased value of what he is selling as a direct result of your actions.
[...]

What the hell?

How did my expection to receive an PM to get the proof of ownership decrease the value of what he is selling?

I didn't know accounts lose value for each PM sent... But that's probably because i don't buy/sell accounts..

If i bid on an auction item and then disagree to pay i would be considered untrustworthy to hold a deal/

[AdolfinWolf]

[..] After receiving the confidential information, you did not follow through on your end of the contract, and the person suffered damages in the form of decreased value of what he is selling as a direct result of your actions.
[...]

What the hell?

How did my expection to receive an PM to get the proof of ownership decrease the value of what he is selling?

I didn't know accounts lose value for each PM sent... But that's probably because i don't buy/sell accounts..

If i bid on an auction item and then disagree to pay i would be considered untrustworthy to hold a deal/

Not relevant/applicable here. Ofcourse it would.   That's more or less the equivalent of:  "If i steal candy would i be considered a thief?"

[otrkid1970]

[..] After receiving the confidential information, you did not follow through on your end of the contract, and the person suffered damages in the form of decreased value of what he is selling as a direct result of your actions.
[...]

What the hell?

How did my expection to receive an PM to get the proof of ownership decrease the value of what he is selling?

I didn't know accounts lose value for each PM sent... But that's probably because i don't buy/sell accounts..

If i bid on an auction item and then disagree to pay i would be considered untrustworthy to hold a deal/

Not relevant/applicable here. Ofcourse it would. 

ok Hitler

[AdolfinWolf]

ok Hitler

Sorry?

[suchmoon]

If you want to look at what you are buying before being obligated to buy said item, you should not make an offer before seeing it.

An offer is not an obligation. In my state even when buying a house an offer is just an offer and can be withdrawn for any reason before you sign an actual contract. Let alone buying a bicycle on Craigslist and making an offer over the phone.

[Quickseller]

[..] After receiving the confidential information, you did not follow through on your end of the contract, and the person suffered damages in the form of decreased value of what he is selling as a direct result of your actions.
[...]

What the hell?

How did my expection to receive an PM to get the proof of ownership decrease the value of what he is selling?

I didn't know accounts lose value for each PM sent... But that's probably because i don't buy/sell accounts..

The value decreased when you disclosed the confidential information.

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

Sting operations are always double edged sword.

Sting operations are a) done by law enforcement with strict oversight, and b) do not allow law enforcement to steal (or attempt to steal) from others, nor do they allow law enforcement to commit other torts

If you want to look at what you are buying before being obligated to buy said item, you should not make an offer before seeing it.

An offer is not an obligation. In my state even when buying a house an offer is just an offer and can be withdrawn for any reason before you sign an actual contract. Let alone buying a bicycle on Craigslist and making an offer over the phone.

The offer does not expose a person to liability. In order for an offer to obligate the person making the offer, it will need to be accepted by the other party prior to the offer being withdrawn, or expiring.

[bob123]

The value decreased when you disclosed the confidential information.

Which itself has nothing to do with the 'contract'. What is the 'confidential information' in your eyes ?
The only thing which is 'confidential' is the PM i received. And this PM itself did not decrease the value.

The fact that i called him out for doing shady business is what decreased the value. And ONLY if you really want to call it like that.
Because the accounts had no real value. They were sold for a price. That's it. But the real value was close to zero.. it is just some shitty account which is being traded. No value behind it.


By the way.. i don't have a problem with tagging account sellers and their accounts. Even if they 'lose value'.
I know that sounds harsh to someone who owns multiple accounts.. but it is the truth.

The offer does not expose a person to liability. In order for an offer to obligate the person making the offer, it will need to be accepted by the other party prior to the offer being withdrawn, or expiring.

There were so much things missing regarding the 'trade' that it wouldn't even be called 'similar to a contract' in my country..

[Quickseller]

The value decreased when you disclosed the confidential information.

Which itself has nothing to do with the 'contract'. What is the 'confidential information' in your eyes ?
The only thing which is 'confidential' is the PM i received. And this PM itself did not decrease the value.

The fact that i called him out for doing shady business is what decreased the value. And ONLY if you really want to call it like that.
Because the accounts had no real value. They were sold for a price. That's it. But the real value was close to zero.. it is just some shitty account which is being traded. No value behind it.


By the way.. i don't have a problem with tagging account sellers and their accounts. Even if they 'lose value'.
I know that sounds harsh to someone who owns multiple accounts.. but it is the truth.

It is the exposing the information he gave you that caused the damages. In conjunction with your not following through on what you said you would do causes the flag the person could create to be valid.

If you want to go around damaging the value of what other people are selling, I think that is kinda sleazy, but go ahead and do that, just don't fail to follow through on your obligations in the process.

The offer does not expose a person to liability. In order for an offer to obligate the person making the offer, it will need to be accepted by the other party prior to the offer being withdrawn, or expiring.

There were so much things missing regarding the 'trade' that it wouldn't even be called 'similar to a contract' in my country..

You can learn about contracts here.

[marlboroza]

Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this..

Sting operations are always double edged sword.

Sting operations are a) done by law enforcement with strict oversight, and b) do not allow law enforcement to steal (or attempt to steal) from others, nor do they allow law enforcement to commit other torts

Thanks for explaining me something I know. Jesus, some people on this forum  
@OP good job exposing those accounts, account with positive trust could end up in wrong hands and do damage. Don't listen to QS, just take a look at his signature - he is knowingly advertising pump and dump.

[bones261]

It is the exposing the information he gave you that caused the damages. In conjunction with your not following through on what you said you would do causes the flag the person could create to be valid.

Perhaps the flag will be valid. However, who is going to support it? In order for the banner and the warning to display for a person, 3 people on their trust list have to support it. I certainly do not see 3 DT1 and DT2 members supporting such a flag. Perhaps the account sellers/farmers can get together and create their own trust network. 

[sandy-is-fine]

Damn. A+ for effort. That's some hardcore detective work. Here i was thinking Legendary/Hero account sellers were a myth by now.
-[clip]-

Here's one for sale for .45BTC:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5157380.0
They're all over the place. 

[Quickseller]

It is the exposing the information he gave you that caused the damages. In conjunction with your not following through on what you said you would do causes the flag the person could create to be valid.

Perhaps the flag will be valid. However, who is going to support it? In order for the banner and the warning to display for a person, 3 people on their trust list have to support it. I certainly do not see 3 DT1 and DT2 members supporting such a flag. Perhaps the account sellers/farmers can get together and create their own trust network. 

I’m sure there are at least three people in DT willing to support a flag for someone who was harmed, even if the underlying business they are involved in is not well liked.

If someone can break their agreements with someone who is unpopular, the trust system would be pretty pointless, and would be nothing other than a popularity contest.

[bob123]

I’m sure there are at least three people in DT willing to support a flag for someone who was harmed, even if the underlying business they are involved in is not well liked.

Actually, the description of the flag says:

This user violated a written contract with me, resulting in damages.

The first point we can argue about is the violation. We have different point of views regarding this.


But absolutely clear is, that the so-called 'violation' definitely did NOT result in any damage at all.

What resulted in 'damage' was that i didn't just keep my mouth shut but took the appropriate action to tag the accounts as being up for sale.
1) This actually isn't any damage at all. The accounts ARE worth way less because being some good of a trade. Other people (outside of the trade) just didn't know it before the tag. Now, it is fair, since everyone has the same information regarding these accounts (the fact that they are just a good in a trade and that they shouldn't be trusted).
My actions did NOT reduce the value of these accounts, they revealed the actual value to everybody on this forum.
2) The 'damage' is not the result of rescinding from the 'trade'. It is the result of sharing information which everyone should have access too.


So, no.. I don't believe the flag would be appropriate.

[suchmoon]

2) The 'damage' is not the result of rescinding from the 'trade'. It is the result of sharing information which everyone should have access too.

Damn right. Quicksy would probably try to call it an "implied contract" of keeping quiet but he's also said in the past that PMs are not private. If you ever get a flag for this I'll oppose it.

[Quickseller]

2) The 'damage' is not the result of rescinding from the 'trade'. It is the result of sharing information which everyone should have access too.

Damn right. Quicksy would probably try to call it an "implied contract" of keeping quiet but he's also said in the past that PMs are not private. If you ever get a flag for this I'll oppose it.

The only reason why he received the information in the first place is because he entered into an agreement.

The OP would not have received said information if he had not agreed to buy the forum accounts after receiving the PM.

It is good to know you will oppose holding someone accountable for not honoring their terms of an agreement, and that you will protect someone who lied in order to get something from someone.

[suchmoon]

2) The 'damage' is not the result of rescinding from the 'trade'. It is the result of sharing information which everyone should have access too.

Damn right. Quicksy would probably try to call it an "implied contract" of keeping quiet but he's also said in the past that PMs are not private. If you ever get a flag for this I'll oppose it.

The only reason why he received the information in the first place is because he entered into an agreement.

If I see a bicycle you're selling and tell everyone that it's ugly and the chain is broken - I don't think I'm in breach of a contract. Regardless of whether I subsequently buy the bicycle or not. Regardless of whether I mentioned a dollar amount beforehand or not.

Well done though - such valiant selfless defence of account farmers.

[Quickseller]

2) The 'damage' is not the result of rescinding from the 'trade'. It is the result of sharing information which everyone should have access too.

Damn right. Quicksy would probably try to call it an "implied contract" of keeping quiet but he's also said in the past that PMs are not private. If you ever get a flag for this I'll oppose it.

The only reason why he received the information in the first place is because he entered into an agreement.

If I see a bicycle you're selling and tell everyone that it's ugly and the chain is broken - I don't think I'm in breach of a contract. Regardless of whether I subsequently buy the bicycle or not. Regardless of whether I mentioned a dollar amount beforehand or not.

Well done though - such valiant selfless defence of account farmers.

Perhaps you should stop commenting if you don't know what you are talking about -- I get that you want to make use of that paid avatar, but these types of posts are very harmful.

None of what you said has anything to do with the specific fact set that results in the OP being in breach of contract with the seller he was dealing with.

[suchmoon]

Perhaps you should stop commenting if you don't know what you are talking about -- I get that you want to make use of that paid avatar, but these types of posts are very harmful.

None of what you said has anything to do with the specific fact set that results in the OP being in breach of contract with the seller he was dealing with.

LOL, projecting as usual. Unlike your Yobit signature, my avatar doesn't require me to post in order to get paid.

How about instead of running in circles trying to stretch this to a definition of a contract you go ahead and create the flag or contact the account seller and ask him to do that. I have a feeling it would be seen as "at least partially false" by quite a few users.

[xtraelv]

None of what you said has anything to do with the specific fact set that results in the OP being in breach of contract with the seller he was dealing with.

It depends on what was discussed.

Unless I missed something - they way I read it was that the OP just showed interest in buying an account in a "sting operation".

In order for a "breach of contract to occur there has to be offer and acceptance".

If the OP stated that he would buy a specific account once he verified that the seller owned it then there would be acceptance.

Whether anyone on DT would tag someone for breaking a contract for something that is discouraged on this forum is another matter.

A contract requires three essential components.

Offer
Acceptance of identical terms of the offer.
Consideration


But from what I read:

1)
After requesting proof of ownership of cicizhang and TanClan98 from SeW900, he told me that 'the account' already is banned.
Therefore he proposed me 2 other accounts, which i can buy (zackie and Zedster).

He told me to contact @TrustedAccSeller (via telegram), which i did.


After a long conversation with him and multiple excuses i brought up to not buy an account which he had proven the ownership of (because i wanted to tag as much accounts as possible), i finally got the proof of ownership of multiple accounts and names of a few accounts without proof of ownership.

The fact that they were initially discussing an account that was not even available indicates that there was an "invitation to treat" rather than an offer.

"...an expression of willingness to negotiate. A person making an invitation to treat does not intend to be bound as soon as it is accepted by the person to whom the statement is addressed.

2)
Rueduciel offered me J Gambler.But he did not send me a proof for ownership because he noticed that this account already is reserved for some other buyer.
Therefore he proposed me the account fitty, which he proved that he indeed has control over this account via a PM.

But now i really wanted to also have his first account (J Gambler) to be flagged too. I asked him whether i can have this account if i additionally pay 50$ on top (not like 400$ aren't enough already).
He agreed.

Unfortunately i made a big mistake by leaving him a negative trust rating BEFORE contacting, paired with my sense of humor regarding the chosen username, which interfered my plan. He came to the conclusion that my alt (alice321) is related to me (bob123).

This is possibly a bit closer to a potential contract.

In my view the "buyer" made a "request for information" (invitation to treat) where consideration was discussed rather than an offer.

I asked him whether i can have this account if i additionally pay 50$ on top (not like 400$ aren't enough already).

I consider this a “invitations to treat”, “requests for information” or “statements of intention” rather than an offer.

He agreed.

(That the account was for sale for such an amount = Offer

However there is no information that indicates the "buyer" accepted the sellers offer.


For that to occur there would have to have been a statement like "if you accept $ for the account I will buy it" rather than "would you accept $ ?"


I do not agree that there was a contract. Also even if there was a contract I doubt that anyone would tag him for it.

To the OP I would have to ask whether the end result justifies the means.. It is treading into a grey area of ethics. The outcome is tiny for something that is an epidemic on this forum.

I'm not a fan of private sting operations. There are many other initiatives in place that in my view are much better suited at addressing the problem like permabans for plagiarized content by account farmers.

Please note that I find account buyers and sellers untrustworthy. But it is permitted (but discouraged) under the forum rules.

[SeW900]

This is true, I'm connected to trusted seller for finding a buyer so that I would have a commission to him. The account was owned or was bought and up to sell it, It was discourage by the forum because of the spam however it's not definitely against the rules isn't? Why would you ban an account that's up for sale? isn't the only one who should be tagged is the seller for selling an account?


Last question, the OP can be trusted? wherein a matter of privacy was leaked? The OP REVEAL A CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION  and didn't know the value of privacy does this person should be trusted by anyone? even if the selling of account is illegal the OP should respected the matter of privacy of two parties. We know it was discouraged by the forum but not totally a major offense in here. The main offense I think if it started to post spam posts, used the account to join on single campaign, the account was used for scamming and illegal works but up for selling? i don't know.

PS. A lot of people here didn't see the situation, they thought thought that we should be tagged for selling which is not an offense but only discourage and they praised the person who leaks a confidential information and must be trusted?

[bob123]

Why would you ban an account that's up for sale?

No one bans these accounts.

They receive a negative trust rating, because they are not to be trusted.


The account is not banned and can be still used the same way. But other people have to be warned that the so-called 'hero member with +6 trust' is just a sold account and anyone could be the owner.

isn't the only one who should be tagged is the seller for selling an account?

No. The account itself needs to be tagged.

Using a bought and higher rank account lets other user think that the person is trustworthy (especially the account with +6 trust rating).
If the account is being sold, the account holder can not be trusted at all because it could be anyone without any effort being put into 'his' account. And therefore the negative trust rating.

Last question, the OP can be trusted? wherein a matter of privacy was leaked? The OP REVEAL A CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION 

Information about an potential trade was made public.
This is absolutely fine. You never told me to keep that confidential.

I am free to share my own chat history.

PS. A lot of people here didn't see the situation

I have uploaded the screenshots of the whole conversation. Anyone who wants to see it, can see it.

they thought thought that we should be tagged for selling which is not an offense but only discourage and they praised the person who leaks a confidential information and must be trusted?

Making my own chat history public and warning others (especially newbies) about fake higher-rank member means that i am untrustworthy in monetary terms?
Not really..

[zackie]

WTF is going on here? Mindtrust, remove your negative feedback. My account isn't for sale. And I also did not got hacked, but I'm going to change my password right now, just to be sure!

[mindrust]

WTF is going on here? Mindtrust, remove your negative feedback. My account isn't for sale. And I also did not got hacked, but I'm going to change my password right now, just to be sure!

https://imgur.com/if7k5iX

You believe this screen shot is fake? I'd like to hear more about it.

And it is mindrust.

The T is silent.

[zackie]

Yeah, I'm really surprised. I have no explanation for that but my account is NOT for sale! And I changed the password a few minutes ago.
How can I find out wheter I got hacked? I don't have these messages in the outbox,  I haven't even used this account for weeks...

[mindrust]

Yeah, I'm really surprised. I have no explanation for that but my account is NOT for sale! And I changed the password a few minutes ago.
How can I find out wheter I got hacked? I don't have these messages in the outbox,  I haven't even used this account for weeks...

You can't know if you were hacked. There is no email notification if someone else logs into your account so you can't just say "I wasn't hacked"

If you weren't hacked that means It was you who sent those PM's which make things even worse.

Now you need to verify if you really are the original owner of the account. Signing a message from an old address would work.

[actmyname]

Yeah, I'm really surprised. I have no explanation for that but my account is NOT for sale! And I changed the password a few minutes ago.
How can I find out wheter I got hacked? I don't have these messages in the outbox,  I haven't even used this account for weeks...

Unfortunately, there is no way to prove that you did not send that message unless we pry into your every detail of your life during the surrounding period.

There is no way to differentiate a user that sent the message and is now lying about not sending the message and one that didn't send the message (where some other entity did)

And it is mindrust.

The T is silent.

Cool, thanks mindrus'

[zackie]

Now you need to verify if you really are the original owner of the account. Signing a message from an old address would work.

I have some old addresses from 2015 or even 2013 to sign. But that wouldn't proof anything. I'm not the only one with some old addresses.

[mindrust]

Yeah, I'm really surprised. I have no explanation for that but my account is NOT for sale! And I changed the password a few minutes ago.
How can I find out wheter I got hacked? I don't have these messages in the outbox,  I haven't even used this account for weeks...

Unfortunately, there is no way to prove that you did not send that message unless we pry into your every detail of your life during the surrounding period.

There is no way to differentiate a user that sent the message and is now lying about not sending the message and one that didn't send the message (where some other entity did)

And it is mindrust.

The T is silent.

Cool, thanks mindrus'

Wrong "t" bruh.

[Steamtyme]

Another option is to reach out to the Cryptios team. They have access to some IP data for users and their accounts when they log in, to help with account recoveries or lock accounts that seem to be acting suspicious. Not sure if they will respond but that's the route I would go to clear my name in this situation.

[mindrust]

Now you need to verify if you really are the original owner of the account. Signing a message from an old address would work.

I have some old addresses from 2015 or even 2013 to sign. But that wouldn't proof anything. I'm not the only one with some old addresses.

That doesn't make sense.

Your private key belongs (and should) to you and you only.  (you need to have had posted that address sometime in the past in the forum, so we'll know if that's really you)

Might be an address you used to join a giveaway, sig camp. whatever.

[actmyname]

That doesn't make sense.

Your private key belongs (and should) to you and you only.

Unless they're alluding to the fact that some sellers provide the staked key along with the account sale?

Wrong "t" bruh.

Ah, so mintrus right?

[mindrust]

That doesn't make sense.

Your private key belongs (and should) to you and you only.

Unless they're alluding to the fact that some sellers provide the staked key along with the account sale?

Wrong "t" bruh.

Ah, so mintrus right?

Hmm... So IP check is a better solution I guess.

Never use a password you used before on any website. Databases are getting hacked daily.

[zackie]

Another option is to reach out to the Cryptios team. They have access to some IP data for users and their accounts when they log in, to help with account recoveries or lock accounts that seem to be acting suspicious. Not sure if they will respond but that's the route I would go to clear my name in this situation.

Thanks for that. I will contact him tomorrow, it's late here in Germany....

[Steamtyme]

Thanks for that. I will contact him tomorrow, it's late here in Germany....

No problem. It's the only way to really provide insight that it wasn't you. Not definitive as far as I know but helpful especially if they logged in from half way around the world. Unless you were doing some form of 24 hour live stream but that's unlikely.

[Quickseller]

Another option is to reach out to the Cryptios team. They have access to some IP data for users and their accounts when they log in, to help with account recoveries or lock accounts that seem to be acting suspicious. Not sure if they will respond but that's the route I would go to clear my name in this situation.

I don’t think he needs to prove his innocence. The OP needs to prove guilt. He can report the PMs to a moderator who can authenticate the PMs.

[Steamtyme]

I don’t think he needs to prove his innocence. The OP needs to prove guilt. He can report the PMs to a moderator who can authenticate the PMs.

I don't know that Admins would take the time to authenticate the PM's. I would say OP showed their work on this just fine using the screenshot of the PM's they were able to receive in an attempt to prove availability of accounts for sale. That being said zackie has been shown a way to prove their claims that they were hacked didn't notice and then came back to see the tag. What more proof would you be looking for apart from the image showing received PM's? There are also chat logs to back them up.

[Quickseller]

I don’t think he needs to prove his innocence. The OP needs to prove guilt. He can report the PMs to a moderator who can authenticate the PMs.

I don't know that Admins would take the time to authenticate the PM's. I would say OP showed their work on this just fine using the screenshot of the PM's they were able to receive in an attempt to prove availability of accounts for sale. That being said zackie has been shown a way to prove their claims that they were hacked didn't notice and then came back to see the tag. What more proof would you be looking for apart from the image showing received PM's? There are also chat logs to back them up.

It is trivial to fake a screenshot....they have been faked in the past few months.

[Steamtyme]

It is trivial to fake a screenshot....they have been faked in the past few months.

Correct but usually there is a motive or something to gain from doing so for people who are inclined to try and spread the lies. I don't see any reason for that here, if nothing there is immensely more to lose from pulling those sort of shenanigans. So taken in context I believe the screenshots to be authentic. So in this instance I would ask again what you would need to see for proof?
I'm always interested to find more ways to authenticate online conversations, good tools to have with all the he said she said stuff that goes on.

[LoyceV]

WTF is going on here? Mindtrust, remove your negative feedback. My account isn't for sale. And I also did not got hacked, but I'm going to change my password right now, just to be sure!

Is the PM in your outbox?

Check your IP log:

For now, I added this page where you can see your IP logs for the past 30 days: https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php . You could pretty easily write a userscript to periodically check this and warn you if it's weird. (But don't scrape it on every pageload.)

I don't want to make older IP logs automatically accessible because that'd give a hacker a bunch of useful/sensitive information. But 30 days is probably not too harmful.

I don’t think he needs to prove his innocence. The OP needs to prove guilt. He can report the PMs to a moderator who can authenticate the PMs.

I don't know that Admins would take the time to authenticate the PM's.

If bob123 gives me access to his throw away account alice321, I'll confirm the PM (if it's there ).

I have some old addresses from 2015 or even 2013 to sign.

It has to be an address posted in an unedited old post.

[suchmoon]

Is the PM in your outbox?

I don't have these messages in the outbox

[bob123]

Yeah, I'm really surprised. I have no explanation for that but my account is NOT for sale! And I changed the password a few minutes ago.
How can I find out wheter I got hacked? I don't have these messages in the outbox,  I haven't even used this account for weeks...

What a coincidence 

I hope you understand that this is hard to believe.. especially since you didn't post in the last ~8 months and coincidentally came online yesterday 

I don't see a way you can proof this certainly wasn't you or someone you tasked with selling your account.

A signed message only shows that this is really you at the moment.
And IP logs only show whether you used the same IP to log in. This doesn't say anything about someone you tasked with selling your account or a VPN / proxy you might have used.

I don’t think he needs to prove his innocence. The OP needs to prove guilt. He can report the PMs to a moderator who can authenticate the PMs.

It is trivial to fake a screenshot....they have been faked in the past few months.

I think i have shown enough proof.
It is quite amusing how you (as an account farmer) are trying to protect account seller with every possible way.

Maybe @TrustedAccSeller is your seller / buyer ?
Or is it simply you ?

If bob123 gives me access to his throw away account alice321, I'll confirm the PM (if it's there ).

Done.
I have send LoyceV a message containing the login credentials. He can verify the messages.

[LoyceV]

Screenshot of my received PMs: here and here.

After checking alice321's account, I can confirm the authenticity of these PMs.

[zackie]

Hi guys,

I've had some time to think about what has happend so far. Yesterday I felt anger towards mindrust and I said that my account didn't get hacked.
But it looks like it was definitively the case and I should thank mindrust for discovering that. Otherwise I could have lost it to a scammer.
So thanks mindrust!

It also doesn't make sense to contact Cryptios and waste his and my time. If I had done something fishy, I would have used a VPN.

The only thing I can do is signing a message with an old BTC address. I found an old post from 2013 with a BTC address in it and I still own the private key.
So what do you want me to sign?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=195037.msg2201120#msg2201120

I hope that helps to prove that I'm at least the person who opened the account in 2013. Someone could still argue that I know  "SeW900" an that I wanted to sell my
account through him.   Think about that: 140 Dollars is probably a lot of money in some countries, but here in Germany it's nothing! 125 Euros? Seriously?
I could earn more by working during the time it takes to sell my account.

EDIT:

Message: I'm the real zackie!
BTC Address: 161sehE3mkW8owcE5Gt17ph2pvL1891K56
Signature: IO9Jpt4mf4H8UrI+lSCaL3wgO/ygylQyOWVDtDCIusCQYSAYKH5thX+HpbE5TbGCmDLtUEy9O99jSWr48z7R3WI=

[Steamtyme]

It also doesn't make sense to contact Cryptios and waste his and my time. If I had done something fishy, I would have used a VPN.
EDIT:

Message: I'm the real zackie!
BTC Address: 161sehE3mkW8owcE5Gt17ph2pvL1891K56
Signature: IO9Jpt4mf4H8UrI+lSCaL3wgO/ygylQyOWVDtDCIusCQYSAYKH5thX+HpbE5TbGCmDLtUEy9O99jSWr48z7R3WI=

Verified using https://bitcotools.com/verify-messages

This doesn't prove you didn't try to sell the account, neither does saying it's not worth it to for you to sell it. So without any other attempts by you to prove it was hacked which the Cryptios team may have been able to do, it will forever look like you just got caught.

If your fine with that then there's nothing left for anyone to do here.

[marlboroza]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=195037.msg2201120#msg2201120

EDIT:

Message: I'm the real zackie!
BTC Address: 161sehE3mkW8owcE5Gt17ph2pvL1891K56
Signature: IO9Jpt4mf4H8UrI+lSCaL3wgO/ygylQyOWVDtDCIusCQYSAYKH5thX+HpbE5TbGCmDLtUEy9O99jSWr48z7R3WI=

Verified.

Please sign message and put today's date in it.

Do you mean like that:

Message: I'm the real zackie! 25.06.2019
Address: 161sehE3mkW8owcE5Gt17ph2pvL1891K56
Signature: H7YRZX+u6Hn74XJDfxsWhxPfFcr4a7BHzZkecds67jajGFQgo7KouaDIlq/SF5+Xei6sSNYNRjP1sjo5hYPSgiw=

Thanks, verified:



Now we should wait for account seller number 2 to jump in with "flag" accusation against OP 

[zackie]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=195037.msg2201120#msg2201120

EDIT:

Message: I'm the real zackie!
BTC Address: 161sehE3mkW8owcE5Gt17ph2pvL1891K56
Signature: IO9Jpt4mf4H8UrI+lSCaL3wgO/ygylQyOWVDtDCIusCQYSAYKH5thX+HpbE5TbGCmDLtUEy9O99jSWr48z7R3WI=

Verified.

Please sign message and put today's date in it.

Do you mean like that:

Message: I'm the real zackie! 25.06.2019
Address: 161sehE3mkW8owcE5Gt17ph2pvL1891K56
Signature: H7YRZX+u6Hn74XJDfxsWhxPfFcr4a7BHzZkecds67jajGFQgo7KouaDIlq/SF5+Xei6sSNYNRjP1sjo5hYPSgiw=

[Quickseller]

The signed message doesn’t prove anything unfortunately. I also don’t buy the whole hacked argument either.

[zackie]

This doesn't prove you didn't try to sell the account, neither does saying it's not worth it to for you to sell it. So without any other attempts by you to prove it was hacked which the Cryptios team may have been able to do, it will forever look like you just got caught.

As I said, that proves nothing because of VPNs. I could do whatever you or anybody else here wants, there will always be somebody saying: "But this is still no evidence, do this and do that!" This will be a
never ending story. I'm the real zackie and this account is not for sale. Believe it or not, I don't care. As I said, 125 Euros is no money here in Germany, all this efforts wouldn't make sense.

So looks like I'm done here, my time is precious. At least I'm happy to have my account (back).

[zackie]

The signed message doesn’t prove anything unfortunately. I also don’t buy the whole hacked argument either.

Haha, yes. Exactly what I wrote in my last post! The never ending story!

At least I can understand you all. The world is full of scammers who want to steal your money! So be careful! 

[AdolfinWolf]

<...>

Uhmm okay... So according to your previous posts, you've gotten no notice of your account being breached, and yet after being gone for 8 months, all of a sudden you find the topic where someone is providing proof that you're selling your account?

How did you notice (?) I mean, the entropy of you just all of a sudden stumbling upon this post/thread must be like.. insane...?

[bones261]

The signed message doesn’t prove anything unfortunately. I also don’t buy the whole hacked argument either.

I don't buy it either. However, it's plausible that the account is still under the control of the original owner. It may be an account farmer trying to rescue the value of his merchandise. Who knows. However, we should give him the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps a neutral tag is more in order in this case. At least with the new system, neutral rating's show up as a tally.

[LoyceV]

As I said, that proves nothing because of VPNs. I could do whatever you or anybody else here wants, there will always be somebody saying: "But this is still no evidence, do this and do that!" This will be a
never ending story. I'm the real zackie and this account is not for sale. Believe it or not, I don't care.

Have you checked https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php ? You have only 30 days to see the account thief's IP address.

[mindrust]

Hi guys,

I've had some time to think about what has happend so far. Yesterday I felt anger towards mindrust and I said that my account didn't get hacked.
But it looks like it was definitively the case and I should thank mindrust for discovering that. Otherwise I could have lost it to a scammer.
So thanks mindrust!

It also doesn't make sense to contact Cryptios and waste his and my time. If I had done something fishy, I would have used a VPN.

The only thing I can do is signing a message with an old BTC address. I found an old post from 2013 with a BTC address in it and I still own the private key.
So what do you want me to sign?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=195037.msg2201120#msg2201120

I hope that helps to prove that I'm at least the person who opened the account in 2013. Someone could still argue that I know  "SeW900" an that I wanted to sell my
account through him.   Think about that: 140 Dollars is probably a lot of money in some countries, but here in Germany it's nothing! 125 Euros? Seriously?
I could earn more by working during the time it takes to sell my account.

EDIT:

Message: I'm the real zackie!
BTC Address: 161sehE3mkW8owcE5Gt17ph2pvL1891K56
Signature: IO9Jpt4mf4H8UrI+lSCaL3wgO/ygylQyOWVDtDCIusCQYSAYKH5thX+HpbE5TbGCmDLtUEy9O99jSWr48z7R3WI=

I didn't discover anything, the OP did. I only tagged your account so it will be visible to the other forum members.

The community isn't fully convinced it seems, I'll change the color of the trust rating from red to neutral explaining what happened.

I see bought accounts with neutral ratings from time to time and since you showed some effort by signing a message from a very old address, I'll give you that.

[zackie]

As I said, that proves nothing because of VPNs. I could do whatever you or anybody else here wants, there will always be somebody saying: "But this is still no evidence, do this and do that!" This will be a
never ending story. I'm the real zackie and this account is not for sale. Believe it or not, I don't care.

Have you checked https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php ? You have only 30 days to see the account thief's IP address.

Holy crap! Thanks for that link. Here is the result:

2019-06-25 18:52:29   2019-06-25 19:53:15   xx.xxx.xxx.xx   XXXXXXXx, Germany
2019-06-24 22:00:53   2019-06-24 22:01:56   xxxx:xx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx   XXXXXXXX, Germany
2019-06-24 20:03:48   2019-06-24 20:52:38   xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx    XXXXXXX, Germany
2019-06-19 09:38:21   2019-06-20 14:02:48   42.201.183.65   Karachi, Pakistan

Indeed, somebody from Pakistan used my account!

But hey, you know.... I could have used a VPN....

[zackie]

The community isn't fully convinced it seems, I'll change the color of the trust rating from red to neutral explaining what happened.

I see bought accounts with neutral ratings from time to time and since you showed some effort by signing a message from a very old address, I'll give you that.

Thanks for that

[LoyceV]

The community isn't fully convinced it seems, I'll change the color of the trust rating from red to neutral explaining what happened.

I'd say there's reasonable doubt. It's not the first case I've seen recently in which an account was used by someone else without changing the password. That's probably to prevent the account from getting locked or recovered by the real owner.

[xtraelv]

A lot of sold accounts have been stolen.
A common way to have your account stolen is through visiting a phishing site.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4426885.0

Be very careful with clicking google links. Many of the links direct to phishing sites.

[bob123]

As I said, that proves nothing because of VPNs. I could do whatever you or anybody else here wants, there will always be somebody saying: "But this is still no evidence, do this and do that!" This will be a
never ending story. I'm the real zackie and this account is not for sale. Believe it or not, I don't care.

Have you checked https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php ? You have only 30 days to see the account thief's IP address.

Holy crap! Thanks for that link. Here is the result:

2019-06-25 18:52:29   2019-06-25 19:53:15   xx.xxx.xxx.xx   XXXXXXXx, Germany
2019-06-24 22:00:53   2019-06-24 22:01:56   xxxx:xx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx   XXXXXXXX, Germany
2019-06-24 20:03:48   2019-06-24 20:52:38   xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx    XXXXXXX, Germany
2019-06-19 09:38:21   2019-06-20 14:02:48   42.201.183.65   Karachi, Pakistan

Indeed, somebody from Pakistan used my account!

But hey, you know.... I could have used a VPN....

Could you let any trusted member of the community log into your account to verify the IP log ?
Once done - and given that the IP log indeed shows a weird login from pakistan -  i will too remove my negative rating.

[Quickseller]

As I said, that proves nothing because of VPNs. I could do whatever you or anybody else here wants, there will always be somebody saying: "But this is still no evidence, do this and do that!" This will be a
never ending story. I'm the real zackie and this account is not for sale. Believe it or not, I don't care.

Have you checked https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php ? You have only 30 days to see the account thief's IP address.

Holy crap! Thanks for that link. Here is the result:

2019-06-25 18:52:29   2019-06-25 19:53:15   xx.xxx.xxx.xx   XXXXXXXx, Germany
2019-06-24 22:00:53   2019-06-24 22:01:56   xxxx:xx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx   XXXXXXXX, Germany
2019-06-24 20:03:48   2019-06-24 20:52:38   xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx    XXXXXXX, Germany
2019-06-19 09:38:21   2019-06-20 14:02:48   42.201.183.65   Karachi, Pakistan

Indeed, somebody from Pakistan used my account!

But hey, you know.... I could have used a VPN....

Could you let any trusted member of the community log into your account to verify the IP log ?
Once done - and given that the IP log indeed shows a weird login from pakistan -  i will too remove my negative rating.

It is trivial to fake an IP address...you don’t even need to use a VPN. There are services that will allow you to have what appears to be a residential IP address of a distinct location.

[bob123]

It is trivial to fake an IP address...you don’t even need to use a VPN. There are services that will allow you to have what appears to be a residential IP address of a distinct location.

You don't say 

But based on the fact that most accounts offered by the shady person (a.k.a. account seller) only have english posts and this account additionally is active in the german sub, it is very well imaginable that the account got hacked.

We can't be absolutely sure. But if the IP log shows a login from a completely different IP / country while trying to sell this account, it is very probable that it got hacked.
Therefore i will change my neg trust rating to a neutral one if a trustworthy member of this forum confirms the IP log shown.

[marlboroza]

One of accounts tried to scam https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5158687.0 on larger scale.

[actmyname]

If the account has not been proven to belong to a hacker/seller then nothing should happen to it.

nonnakip did change their password and email however that is not evidence for a hack/sale. It's a warning sign.

[bones261]

If the account has not been proven to belong to a hacker/seller then nothing should happen to it.

nonnakip did change their password and email however that is not evidence for a hack/sale. It's a warning sign.

Am I being heavy handed by giving out a neutral rating and posting in the NastyFans thread to give them a warning?

[actmyname]

Am I being heavy handed by giving out a neutral rating and posting in the NastyFans thread to give them a warning?

Certainly not. But this doesn't call for any flag action above that. In my opinion.

[The-One-Above-All]

Did anyone ever verify if the nutildah account sale had a password change?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5134507.msg50719875#msg50719875

this one seems to be escaping the attention of the account sale hunters.

How about the I.P. did that change during the months of it being on sale to the claim from that account later it was never sold?

Can you really flag accounts up for sale ? what if months later that account posts a message it is no longer up for sale?  that could mean it was never sold right?

[zackie]

As I said, that proves nothing because of VPNs. I could do whatever you or anybody else here wants, there will always be somebody saying: "But this is still no evidence, do this and do that!" This will be a
never ending story. I'm the real zackie and this account is not for sale. Believe it or not, I don't care.

Have you checked https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php ? You have only 30 days to see the account thief's IP address.

Holy crap! Thanks for that link. Here is the result:

2019-06-25 18:52:29   2019-06-25 19:53:15   xx.xxx.xxx.xx   XXXXXXXx, Germany
2019-06-24 22:00:53   2019-06-24 22:01:56   xxxx:xx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx   XXXXXXXX, Germany
2019-06-24 20:03:48   2019-06-24 20:52:38   xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx    XXXXXXX, Germany
2019-06-19 09:38:21   2019-06-20 14:02:48   42.201.183.65   Karachi, Pakistan

Indeed, somebody from Pakistan used my account!

But hey, you know.... I could have used a VPN....

Could you let any trusted member of the community log into your account to verify the IP log ?
Once done - and given that the IP log indeed shows a weird login from pakistan -  i will too remove my negative rating.

Yes, I coud do that. But I'm not very active and therefore I don't know which users are trustworthy. You have to name somebody and let me check.

[bob123]

Yes, I coud do that. But I'm not very active and therefore I don't know which users are trustworthy. You have to name somebody and let me check.

I would suggest LoyceV, if he is up for that.
He also logged into my throwaway account and confirmed the PM's.

If you don't trust him or he doesn't want to do that, anyone from DT1 should be fine.
Just make sure to change your password before handing it out, and afterwards again 

[LoyceV]

I would suggest LoyceV, if he is up for that.
He also logged into my throwaway account and confirmed the PM's.

If you don't trust him or he doesn't want to do that, anyone from DT1 should be fine.
Just make sure to change your password before handing it out, and afterwards again  

I can do this if zackie wants me to. If so:
1. Change your password first
2. PM me the password and the link on https://bitcointalk.org/captcha_code.php (I don't want to expose my IP, and I also don't want to click fire hydrants)
3. I'll check https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php and post (censored) results
4. Change your password again
You'll have to do this within 30 days from the compromised login, otherwise myips.php won't show it anymore.

Update

Have you checked https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php ? You have only 30 days to see the account thief's IP address.

2019-06-25 18:52:29   2019-06-25 19:53:15   xx.xxx.xxx.xx   XXXXXXXx, Germany
2019-06-24 22:00:53   2019-06-24 22:01:56   xxxx:xx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx   XXXXXXXX, Germany
2019-06-24 20:03:48   2019-06-24 20:52:38   xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx    XXXXXXX, Germany
2019-06-19 09:38:21   2019-06-20 14:02:48   42.201.183.65   Karachi, Pakistan

Indeed, somebody from Pakistan used my account!

But hey, you know.... I could have used a VPN....

I can confirm this matches https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php on zackie's account. There is no older entry than 2019-06-19 (and this log shows 30 days).

You (zackie) should change your password again. You can also Reset your captcha code.

[bob123]

Update

Have you checked https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php ? You have only 30 days to see the account thief's IP address.

2019-06-25 18:52:29   2019-06-25 19:53:15   xx.xxx.xxx.xx   XXXXXXXx, Germany
2019-06-24 22:00:53   2019-06-24 22:01:56   xxxx:xx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx   XXXXXXXX, Germany
2019-06-24 20:03:48   2019-06-24 20:52:38   xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx    XXXXXXX, Germany
2019-06-19 09:38:21   2019-06-20 14:02:48   42.201.183.65   Karachi, Pakistan

Indeed, somebody from Pakistan used my account!

But hey, you know.... I could have used a VPN....

I can confirm this matches https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php on zackie's account. There is no older entry than 2019-06-19 (and this log shows 30 days).

You (zackie) should change your password again. You can also Reset your captcha code.

I have removed my negative rating and left a neutral one instead.

@zackie
Did you use the same password for multiple sites ? If so, the chances are high that other accounts of you are compromised as well.
If i were you, i'd check them and maybe change all passwords.

[zackie]

Thanks guys.

[TR45EP]

I decided to use some spare time to get some accounts - which are up to sale - flagged.

• pant-79 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=203430

According to him, some of them (the first and/or the second one) are already banned.
However, the remaining ones - which he wanted to sell - are not banned yet.

pant-79 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=203430
This account is mine. July 16, I found that I can not log into my account. As a result of the investigation, I found this thread. As I can see from the information you provided, the thieves got access to my account back in June (as they suggested you to buy this acc back in June). The account is signed by my signature, but unfortunately I no longer have access to the email to which I registered the account. I wrote a letter to the site administration. I hope that the site administration will return my account back to me.

[DireWolfM14]

pant-79 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=203430
This account is mine. July 16, I found that I can not log into my account. As a result of the investigation, I found this thread. As I can see from the information you provided, the thieves got access to my account back in June (as they suggested you to buy this acc back in June). The account is signed by my signature, but unfortunately I no longer have access to the email to which I registered the account. I wrote a letter to the site administration. I hope that the site administration will return my account back to me.

Follow the instructions in this thread, you may be able to recover your account.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5089777.0

[TR45EP]

pant-79 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=203430
This account is mine. July 16, I found that I can not log into my account. As a result of the investigation, I found this thread. As I can see from the information you provided, the thieves got access to my account back in June (as they suggested you to buy this acc back in June). The account is signed by my signature, but unfortunately I no longer have access to the email to which I registered the account. I wrote a letter to the site administration. I hope that the site administration will return my account back to me.

Follow the instructions in this thread, you may be able to recover your account.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5089777.0

Thanks for the link. I have already written a letter with details to recoveries...@bitcointalk.org
I hope that I will regain access to my account. I also see that my account was already sold. Now the one who bought it started a signature campaign. I left him a message clarifying the situation. Perhaps he will be prudent and give me my account back.
I just wanted to write in this thread, because I see that my account count like suspicious. When I get access to it back, I would not want to get a negative trust.

[DireWolfM14]

pant-79 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=203430
This account is mine. July 16, I found that I can not log into my account. As a result of the investigation, I found this thread. As I can see from the information you provided, the thieves got access to my account back in June (as they suggested you to buy this acc back in June). The account is signed by my signature, but unfortunately I no longer have access to the email to which I registered the account. I wrote a letter to the site administration. I hope that the site administration will return my account back to me.

Follow the instructions in this thread, you may be able to recover your account.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5089777.0

Thanks for the link. I have already written a letter with details to recoveries...@bitcointalk.org
I hope that I will regain access to my account. I also see that my account was already sold. Now the one who bought it started a signature campaign. I left him a message clarifying the situation. Perhaps he will be prudent and give me my account back.
I just wanted to write in this thread, because I see that my account count like suspicious. When I get access to it back, I would not want to get a negative trust.

There's some odd things that have gone on with that account:

It was created in 2013, and fairly active until September of 2015 exclusively in the Russian local board.  The account posted only two posts in all of 2016, again in the Russian local.  After that, a 20 month break, and the first post upon return is a message in the staked address thread:

Please quote and verify my message. Thanks.

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is pant-79 @ Bitcointalk.org. Today is July 30, 2018. This address is mine.
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1L1Rtv4w8guaVSbCwqmysWauJDKhVHUMPU
ID4FpM7/J36CVQIji60w+Wyk6GzmA5eUB+6RF+v2IUZMIN+2dagO6ZATGIvqcPKtsuOwOo0uDK+jzDjx9ilzYtk=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Since then, only posts in the main board, not one in the Russian local.  Did you buy this account in 2018?  Can you sign a message with the address quoted above?

[LoyceV]

Now the one who bought it started a signature campaign.

Can you sign a message from an old staked address? If so, I'll tag the account until you have it recovered. That'll probably end his signature campaign earnings.

[TR45EP]

pant-79 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=203430
This account is mine. July 16, I found that I can not log into my account. As a result of the investigation, I found this thread. As I can see from the information you provided, the thieves got access to my account back in June (as they suggested you to buy this acc back in June). The account is signed by my signature, but unfortunately I no longer have access to the email to which I registered the account. I wrote a letter to the site administration. I hope that the site administration will return my account back to me.

Follow the instructions in this thread, you may be able to recover your account.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5089777.0

Thanks for the link. I have already written a letter with details to recoveries...@bitcointalk.org
I hope that I will regain access to my account. I also see that my account was already sold. Now the one who bought it started a signature campaign. I left him a message clarifying the situation. Perhaps he will be prudent and give me my account back.
I just wanted to write in this thread, because I see that my account count like suspicious. When I get access to it back, I would not want to get a negative trust.

There's some odd things that have gone on with that account:

It was created in 2013, and fairly active until September of 2015 exclusively in the Russian local board.  The account posted only two posts in all of 2016, again in the Russian local.  After that, a 20 month break, and the first post upon return is a message in the staked address thread:

Please quote and verify my message. Thanks.

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is pant-79 @ Bitcointalk.org. Today is July 30, 2018. This address is mine.
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1L1Rtv4w8guaVSbCwqmysWauJDKhVHUMPU
ID4FpM7/J36CVQIji60w+Wyk6GzmA5eUB+6RF+v2IUZMIN+2dagO6ZATGIvqcPKtsuOwOo0uDK+jzDjx9ilzYtk=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Since then, only posts in the main board, not one in the Russian local.  Did you buy this account in 2018?  Can you sign a message with the address quoted above?

Absolutely correct.
1. Due to personal circumstances from 2015 to 2018, I could not pay enough attention to crypto currencies. My activity in this direction has fallen a lot.
2. I am a Russian-speaking person, so there is nothing strange in the fact that my first messages were only in Russian. As proof, I can enter into correspondence in Russian. It is just that when conducting bounty campaigns, posts in local branches are not accepted (very often), therefore I have to write only in English branches.
3. In 2018, I returned to trading in crypto currencies. But so I had the need for additional income, I decided to conduct a bounty campaign.
4. Due to the fact that by 2018, cases of hacking accounts have become frequent, my account was signed by me.
5. Also, the site administration can verify that I have not changed the email since the creation of my account pant-79@mail.ru. Just as it turned out now, the password to the email has long been lost, and the mail.ru administration has deleted accounts that were created before 2012, so I don’t even have the opportunity to restore access to the email.

[TR45EP]

Now the one who bought it started a signature campaign.

Can you sign a message from an old staked address? If so, I'll tag the account until you have it recovered. That'll probably end his signature campaign earnings.

Do you mean to sign my current account with the same address that is signed pant -79? If yes, then of course I can.

[LoyceV]

Do you mean to sign my current account with the same address that is signed pant -79? If yes, then of course I can.

Sign from 1L1Rtv4w8guaVSbCwqmysWauJDKhVHUMPU and say something like:

Code:

Today is July 19, 2019, and my account pant-79 is hacked. This message is posted by user TR45EP to prove ownership

[nonnakip]

My account was hacked and sold. I post some details here.

bitcointalk.org forum is very helpful to restore account to me. I say thank you to this thread. You are real heros!

[bones261]

My account was hacked and sold. I post some details here.

bitcointalk.org forum is very helpful to restore account to me. I say thank you to this thread. You are real heros!

Yes, and it appears the one of the members of the enterprise has decided to give a red flag to bob123, whose investigation helped discover this.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=292
It appears some member believe bob123 went to0 far by lying to the account sellers and getting them to reveal details on accounts they were selling and to verify a few. Apparently, this resulted in harm to the poor account sellers because their merchandise could not be sold for a premium. Never mind that it appears 2 out of the 6 accounts are verified as hacked.   I'm glad that bob123's efforts helped you in the end regain control of your account.

[TECSHARE]

My account was hacked and sold. I post some details here.

bitcointalk.org forum is very helpful to restore account to me. I say thank you to this thread. You are real heros!

Yes, and it appears the one of the members of the enterprise has decided to give a red flag to bob123, whose investigation helped discover this.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=292
It appears some member believe bob123 went to0 far by lying to the account sellers and getting them to reveal details on accounts they were selling and to verify a few. Apparently, this resulted in harm to the poor account sellers because their merchandise could not be sold for a premium. Never mind that it appears 2 out of the 6 accounts are verified as hacked.   I'm glad that bob123's efforts helped you in the end regain control of your account.

*entered into a contract with intent to deceive and take rights of another user.

If he was just lying there would be no flag. He formed a contract with intent to defraud and destroy value. He had no way of knowing if the accounts were legitimately obtained or not. The ends do not justify the means. They are both wrong.

[TR45EP]

Do you mean to sign my current account with the same address that is signed pant -79? If yes, then of course I can.

Sign from 1L1Rtv4w8guaVSbCwqmysWauJDKhVHUMPU and say something like:

Code:

Today is July 19, 2019, and my account pant-79 is hacked. This message is posted by user TR45EP to prove ownership

I signed the message. Tell me please where can I check my signature. Earlier, I used the online service https://tools.bitcoin.com/verify-message/, but now it doesn't work. Thank you.

Perhaps the signature itself will be useful: H2sqfbHDbK7dgZGdawoSp9rLyH9pHsC3pTOcxraABGQiJfKFeXbJ8LVmvd+FU9bQQBzAhjZmo3HsxayQ3v/GfKg=

[LoyceV]

Do you mean to sign my current account with the same address that is signed pant -79? If yes, then of course I can.

Sign from 1L1Rtv4w8guaVSbCwqmysWauJDKhVHUMPU and say something like:

Code:

Today is July 19, 2019, and my account pant-79 is hacked. This message is posted by user TR45EP to prove ownership

I signed the message. Tell me please where can I check my signature. Earlier, I used the online service https://tools.bitcoin.com/verify-message/, but now it doesn't work. Thank you.

Perhaps the signature itself will be useful: H2sqfbHDbK7dgZGdawoSp9rLyH9pHsC3pTOcxraABGQiJfKFeXbJ8LVmvd+FU9bQQBzAhjZmo3HsxayQ3v/GfKg=

Verified!
I've tagged the account. You'll have to sign another message when you have your account back, so I can remove the tag.

[TR45EP]

Do you mean to sign my current account with the same address that is signed pant -79? If yes, then of course I can.

Sign from 1L1Rtv4w8guaVSbCwqmysWauJDKhVHUMPU and say something like:

Code:

Today is July 19, 2019, and my account pant-79 is hacked. This message is posted by user TR45EP to prove ownership

I signed the message. Tell me please where can I check my signature. Earlier, I used the online service https://tools.bitcoin.com/verify-message/, but now it doesn't work. Thank you.

Perhaps the signature itself will be useful: H2sqfbHDbK7dgZGdawoSp9rLyH9pHsC3pTOcxraABGQiJfKFeXbJ8LVmvd+FU9bQQBzAhjZmo3HsxayQ3v/GfKg=

Verified!
I've tagged the account. You'll have to sign another message when you have your account back, so I can remove the tag.

Of course. Thank you very much.

[narousberg]

Please remove negative trust point from my account.
I DONT SELL MY ACCOUNT
thanks

[LoyceV]

Please remove negative trust point from my account.
I DONT SELL MY ACCOUNT

Can you explain this PM you've sent to user alice321 a month ago?
Direct link to the screenshot: https://imgur.com/HwLLIE2

[narousberg]

that is not message from me!!! i will change my password now.
looks like somebody have access to my account.

[hacker1001101001]

that is not message from me!!! i will change my password now.
looks like somebody have access to my account.

You should sign a message from any of your connected old address to prove your ownership here, you could be an impostor for most of us.

[narousberg]

how to do this?
which old address your mean? IP or email.
ip is dynamic. I can only send message from my email or twitter.

[narousberg]

posted! https://twitter.com/narousberg

password changed to better one....

upd: I suggest to forum admins to add a 2FA verification!

[LoyceV]

how to do this?
which old address your mean?

I couldn't find any old Bitcoin address in your post history, but archive.org shows 1P4QrAHTrzSFZRfzwTQoTQx4DZjWzRpxH9 in your signature on October 25, 2012.

[narousberg]

this is very old BTC address, i am have no more access to this address

[narousberg]

is post in my twitter is not enough?
my nickname is my family name, how you imagine i will sell my account to some scamers? In this case i will compromise my name.
WTF is this all!

[DireWolfM14]

this is very old BTC address, i am have no more access to this address

It's an old address, but a message was signed with it before.  The address is tagged with your username on Blockchain.com, which requires a message to be signed.

is post in my twitter is not enough?
my nickname is my family name, how you imagine i will sell my account to some scamers? In this case i will compromise my name.
WTF is this all!

A post on twitter doesn't mean anything.  The account seller could have given you all the social media accounts that relate to your Bitcointalk.org account.  The only way is if you can point to an un-edited old post where you posted a different bitcoin or altcoin address that you can use to sign a message.  


BTW; stop multi-posting.  

[narousberg]

Are you see which date a last transaction to this address??? 2014 !!!
This addresses no more under my control, maybe that was addresses from vircurex or MtGox. Simple to old information.
Sorry, but you waste my time. I will write to forum administrator to delete negative trust points. I can verify my identity over my account email, which was never changed.
Have a nice day.

[LoyceV]

Are you see which date a last transaction to this address??? 2014 !!!
This addresses no more under my control, maybe that was addresses from vircurex or MtGox.

The address is from a wallet that allows you to sign a message. Otherwise it couldnt' have your nickname as tag on blockchain.com.

I will write to forum administrator to delete negative trust points.

Trust is not moderated.

[narousberg]

Please remove negative trust point from my account.
I DONT SELL MY ACCOUNT

Can you explain this PM you've sent to user alice321 a month ago?
Direct link to the screenshot: https://imgur.com/HwLLIE2

somebody has definitely hacked my old password, this was very simple. But he cant change password due he dont know secret answer and post some messages.
Now i cant more find this post which on screenshot.

[DireWolfM14]

Sorry, but you waste my time.

Your time?  I spent my time trying to help you.  You're welcome.

This addresses no more under my control, maybe that was addresses from vircurex or MtGox.

Unlikely.  Most exchanges don't provide the option to sign messages.  The private key of the address above had to be accessible by you at one point in time, or the tag on Blockchain wouldn't be possible.

somebody has definitely hacked my old password, this was very simple. But he cant change password due he dont know secret answer and post some messages.
Now i cant more find this post which on screenshot.

This is a distinct possibility.  There have been other members who've had similar issues with their accounts recently.  It could be due to a phishing site tricking members into exposing their username and password.  

Theymos has provided a link that allows us to see our own IP activity for the last month, that may help you find out if someone else has logged into your account.  Look for anything out of the ordinary on June 22.  Here's the link: https://bitcointalk.org/myips.php

[Quickseller]

I don't think the signed messages is sufficient to prove the various accounts were hacked. All a signed message proves is that the person has access to the private key, or can communicate with someone who has access to the private key. A signed message does not confirm the contents of the message are accurate. if tags will be removed from some of those who allegedly had their accounts hacked, it is probably best to remove all the tags in question, even without a signed message.

I don't know how the blockchain.info (now .com) tagging system worked over the years, and don't know if it was ever possible to tag an address without a signed message. I would not find it unreasonable to hear that the private key to someone's 2012 address that was never used to receive bitcoin is lost/inaccessible.

Perhaps theymos can comment on if there is evidence that the accounts in question were hacked, as he can review IP evidence (and other evidence) to see if this is a reasonable conclusion. Until theymos confirms this, I will be unconvinced the accounts in question are hacked.

If the accounts in question are hacked, there may be an unknown security risk to either the forum or popular services widely used by forum users that is leading to many passwords being leaked. 

[actmyname]

somebody has definitely hacked my old password, this was very simple. But he cant change password due he dont know secret answer and post some messages.
Now i cant more find this post which on screenshot.

You do not need the secret answer to change the password.
Anyone who gets into an account would most likely change the password... though it would be smart to delay the changing thereof in case the user notices.

Then again... if someone's password/security is weak enough to have been cracked, are they really likely to adhere to proper security practices and monitoring?

I have now more problems with payouts from pool:
NERO: ZC77q4FBG3EisEJFgXgyNvxHngKPnqabNj  313.91607563
ZEX: ZLkDLTns4QhbiyJ4T3wLzzhTWo8VqkTj2f      26.30958828

support please repair your wallets and resend manualy. 

This is something I found.

Trouble is, how do we know that the owner of this account didn't try to sell it? Any signed address is irrelevant when discussing this point.

[narousberg]

i think, i have access to NERO and ZEX

text: I AM A OWNER of my bitcointalk account!!!
signed with ZEX: ZLkDLTns4QhbiyJ4T3wLzzhTWo8VqkTj2f

signature:  H18wdNWmxtw4E10LviEUUJI2+CYNOUxGTMDLdDEbudVUWy8cLHR5A+7/9HOCU40J/bVGtGF+SU1Q+bd4sfm1GJ4=

Hope this is enough for you.

[mindrust]

ZEXcoin explorer is dead, looks like the project is abandoned.

I don't know if it is possible to confirm the signature without a working network.

This link don't work neither:
https://github.com/zexcoins/zexcoincore/releases/download/v1.0.1.3/windows-zexcoin-qt.zip

[narousberg]

possible, wallet sign messages with private keys from wallet.dat, not with any data from blockchain
you simple need insatal ZEX wallet and check that this message was signed from owner of private key which belong to public address: ZLkDLTns4QhbiyJ4T3wLzzhTWo8VqkTj2f
you are all really waste my time guys, strange that you dont understand basic functions of message sign.

upd: maybe any other PIVX based coin wallet can proof signature too

[actmyname]

Still have this address in play? ragRP8RounvM1iRLt7eCMSSpzr4qesx89C (ripple)

https://archive.is/ySBGJ#selection-2607.0-2607.34You don't have to sign it if it's an exchange one... as long as you can show the link between the address and yourself with sound enough evidence.

[bob123]

you are all really waste my time guys, strange that you dont understand basic functions of message sign.

Honestly.. you waste our time.

Even if you could sign a message using an old staked address, this wouldn't proof anything.
All it would proof is that either 1) you are the original owner of this account or 2) you have contact to the original owner of this account.

However, this is not relevant in this case.
You need to proof that you didn't intend to sell your account. Not that you can sign messages using old addresses appearing on this forum.

[narousberg]

Still have this address in play? ragRP8RounvM1iRLt7eCMSSpzr4qesx89C (ripple)

https://archive.is/ySBGJ#selection-2607.0-2607.34You don't have to sign it if it's an exchange one... as long as you can show the link between the address and yourself with sound enough evidence.

no, very old addr, 2013 !!!