[Doubt the possibility of a scam] BestChange Bounty and Signature Campaign.

[AB de Royse777]

Just found out they have accepted me in their signature campaign. I applied there yesterday knowing that they do not have any escrow. There are campaigns we have seen without escrow and in the first glance it make sense that they will just scam but in this one, I did not feel any red alarm and this is why I applied (this is my personal experience by the way. Other does not have to have the same feeling). I can be damn wrong and after a week they may not pay me which is very possible but in this case they get red tag from me and also from other DTs or users without any question. But right now giving them red seems too harsh.

There are no question that in this forum it is easy to scam users and as a community we those have good experience, we try to protect them. And you are right that 9 out of 10 times who refuse to escrow turns out scammer. Best_Change can resolve it just by asking for an escrow but I have no idea why they are not doing it however not doing this does not mean that we as a community will force them to do it. This topic by eddie13 is a good read: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5207250.0

There are no question that I am new compared to you but this is also true that I also learnt a lot on my way in this forum to protect me and the community. Some of the things but not limited to everything of course is here.

I know when two DT users especially DT user like you who are with the community longer before than me and has a big follow base gets the edge in most of the cases and in this case hearing you actually will benefit me and all those opportunist (the forum is full with opportunist, most of them actually do not care about the community but just pretend to be a part of it) would do this. Shall I do this too?

I think I should but a part of me still says that this is wrong, this is very harsh and this tag of yours should get a counter. A part of me says that I should stand by my decision but if I do then that means that I will be losing my DT status? Does one really need a DT status too speak for what they feel right?

Edit: What is terrible about the +1 in their account, is that newbies can think the account should be trusted, while they clearly can't trust them. They may prove themselves to be trusted (if they pay), but they are promising high payment without any escrow.

You have a point and I removed my counter.

[1714881188]

1714881188

[1714881188]

1714881188

[bitmover]

Does one really need a DT status too speak for what they feel right?

I believe you should do whatever you want and you believe is right and do not care if you are going to stay in dt or not.
DT rules changes and your status come and go, but your reputation stays.

I think you should be more careful when leaving a green trust than when leaving a red one.
I wouldn't mark and account green until I received lots of payments from that account or having a long interaction

[TMAN]

You have a point and I removed my counter.

This is proof that you shouldn't be on DT as you have no idea what the positive trust you give shows to newbies.

you will stay on my exclude list till you show you understand the consequences of your actions, I also will call for other DT1 members to exclude you.

[AB de Royse777]

I wouldn't mark and account green until I received lots of payments from that account or having a long interaction

I too do not hand out greens very easily. I have few guys who took large amount of loans and if I was into sending out greens very easily then those guys deserves the greens. I only leave a green when I am 100% confident about it.

I believe you should do whatever you want and you believe is right and do not care if you are going to stay in dt or not.

I too believe the same. And if I were here to stay in the DT and building up my reputation then I would add users in my trust list and would PM them after with saying that I have added them in my trust list and would also hand out positive feedback to users who I would think may benefit me in future.

I hope you are getting my points here.

This is proof that you shouldn't be on DT as you have no idea what the positive trust you give shows to newbies.

Wrong unless you get some of the sarcastic part of my last post. Quoting bitmover and telling he has a point was just a diversion. Enough with the clues.

I can tell you that you have no idea where to send red tag. There are scopes of leaving red tag and leaving neutral tag. But leave it and let's not argue with who is wrong and who is right here. We both realized one thing here so far is that you and me are good in disagreement in this matter.

you will stay on my exclude list till you show you understand the consequences of your actions

By now you should have some decent idea that I really less care to be in the DT. So it does not matter for me. I still have doubt that your tag was appropriate there. You can only tag them if they do not pay their participants.

I also will call for other DT1 members to exclude you.

If they agree with you then of-course they should exclude me.

[TMAN]

zzzzzzzz

if they scam then its a flag.

if  you dont care about DT and you are showing you have 0 comprehension about how it should work then clear your trust list or ask to be excluded.

it aint hard you fucking spaznozzle forker

[johhnyUA]

I think I should but a part of me still says that this is wrong, this is very harsh and this tag of yours should get a counter. A part of me says that I should stand by my decision but if I do then that means that I will be losing my DT status? Does one really need a DT status too speak for what they feel right?

For honest, even i personally sometimes don't like what TMAN says, now he is clearly right. If something will go fine, trust will be removed, but newbies should be warned. Specially, because bestchange is company founded by russians (i mean by people from post USSR). You can trust only to their deeds, not their words.

Asking to use escrow is normal demand. It's normal way in any business.

[AB de Royse777]

it aint hard you fucking spaznozzle forker

Please do not start your poetry.

if they scam then its a flag.

Falg type 1: Due to various concrete red flags, I believe that anyone dealing with this user has a high risk of losing money. (kinda like neutral tag which really does not carry much value and anyone can create it)
Flag type 2: user violated a casual or implied agreement with me, resulting in damages. (between you and the other party only then you can create one)
Flag type 3 : user violated a written contract with me, resulting in damages. (between you and the other party only then you can create one)

if  you dont care about DT and you are showing you have 0 comprehension about how it should work then clear your trust list or ask to be excluded.

Having a trust list always does not mean that one is doing it just to be in the DT network. Having a trust list means that one trust the judgements of user x or y or z or all or does not trust some of those users.

Asking to be excluded? I think you took that job to do.

Seems like your interpretation of trust setting is different than mine. Listen bud, we both do not have anything personal here so let's just move on.

Cheers,

Specially, because bestchange is company founded by russians (i mean by people from post USSR).

You mean if I start a business then you will not do business with me :-P
Пoйми, чтo я имeю в видy

[TMAN]

my poetry always flows you fucktard

I could raise flag 1, you could raise flag 3 for joining the pajeet campaign with no escrow.

I am right you are wrong, everyone is agreeing with me and you are not helping your cause you dick

[YOSHIE]

~|||~

There are some problems that arise here when and before this topic I made.

1. At the core of the topic, the company (BestChange) has a bad reputation for fraud in client money, in a few dollars against its clients a few years ago.

2. Now they start by promoting their website with bounty and sig campaigns, in high pay to campaign participants and bounties, without using existing escrow, I don't trust them.

3. Red and neutral trust is prioritized for campaign managers for security and payment warnings if not using an escrow service, that they have been involved in a number of fraud cases, possibly like @ yahoo62278 say.

4. If the campaigners are willing to consider escrow, maybe some members here can accept it, and disappear from accusations of fraud they have committed.

5. Here it does not discuss the issue of DT or trust, which is essentially for the comfort and security of bitcointalk members and the Forum against fraud.

6. I support @TMAN what he did was right, in weighing, remembering, and caring about what happened in this forum, and he has said two options for removing red trusts or vice versa.

7. I will see the development of the next campaign, what will happen, will I completely erase the neutral beliefs or vice versa in red and flag against alleged fraud.

[AB de Royse777]

The neutral you left is good enough to warn the visitors now.

On my last post to you, I had this point that you tagged them without doing any investigations of those scam accusations which was clear in your post before me and also tagged them just because they did not use escrow. As always, I can tag them only if they do not pay me after a week and with that I can create a flag 3 too.

[TMAN]

I can tag them only if they do not pay me after a week

incorrect, they can be tagged for refusing escrow. prevention is better than cure.

flags are concrete - tags are fluid and act as a warning

learn about the trust system before you stick your dick into it and enjoy being excluded from DT in the future

[hacker1001101001]

I agree with tagging them for using escorw until the first payment is made for safety reasons and to warn applicants.

But, I don't agree with TMAN's poetry on Royse777 and his reasons to get him off DT as the above could also be donated by a neutral and his ideology seem right at a point.

[TMAN]

But, I don't agree with TMAN's poetry on Royse777 and his reasons to get him off DT as the above could also be donated by a neutral.

Royse gave a nice green trust to a possibly scammy campaign - so yes I will abuse royse and petition other DT members to exclude him

he shouldn't be anywhere near DT if he doesn't understand what his positive and negative tags do

[hacker1001101001]

Royse gave a nice green trust to a possibly scammy campaign - so yes I will abuse royse and petition other DT members to exclude him

But you don't see it as an pattern on his previous sent trust feedbacks, as it clearly shows he sends feedbacks pretty carefully, above was just an indication of him not agreeing with red tagging them for what could be done with a neutral.

[TMAN]

Royse gave a nice green trust to a possibly scammy campaign - so yes I will abuse royse and petition other DT members to exclude him

But you don't see it as an pattern on his previous sent trust feedbacks, as it clearly shows he sends feedbacks pretty carefully, above was just an indication of him not agreeing with red tagging them for what could be done with a neutral.

No it shows he has no idea what he is doing or saying.

I’m right he is wrong, read the whole thread

[AB de Royse777]

Royse gave a nice green trust to a possibly scammy campaign

It seems you have not yet understood my angle of leaving that feedback counter.

TMAN left this:

no escrow campaign - Users be aware. I will remove the tag after the user agrees to escrow or makes 1st payment

I disagree the Tag and I am going to counter yours. And I will tag them if they do not pay their participants as they promised.

Note: counter.

If I was to say something like this: "The exchange is blab blab with all positive things" then you could say that I left them a nice green trust. I was rarely giving them any feedback if there were no neg from you which is still harsh in my opinion.

I’m right he is wrong, read the whole thread

Which side you take? Left or Right?

also be donated by a neutral and his ideology seem right at a point.

Glad it was spoken out. Thanks bud.

[TMAN]

There is no counter any longer. Don’t you understand how the trust system has changed?

[Lauda]

Please, please, Royse777, just please stop. Thanks.

There is no counter any longer. Don’t you understand how the trust system has changed?

Many do not seem to.

[LTU_btc]

I doubt that BestChange signature campaign might be scam, though I can't vouch for them 100%. They are in business for long yers already and they have good reputation. I doubt that they would risk to damage their reputation in order to get some potential users from Bitcointalk.
About scam accusations - I haven't checked is it legit or not, but probably you can find accusation even against exchanges like Binance. Maybe it's not worth to judge service based only on it.
And there is no rule which would require every signature campaign to use escrow. There was a lot of campaigns which didn't used escrow and there was any issue about. I don't that risk of scam is big when campaign is runned by established trusted company.
Their rates are high, but it's not to good to be true. Number of accepted users isn't small, but there was much bigger campaigns and there was no issue in payouts.
But after all, warning tag isn't wrong thing and can stay until first round payments will be made

[efialtis]

Are you guys actually being serious? While I am really a person to support ANY possible scam attempt, that scam accusation is a complete joke and actually a desaster - sorry but thats my 2 cents even though I am still a very newbie in this forum.

BestChange are not the typical exchange, they are more of a directory listing dozens of exchanges where people can exchange their e-currencies. There is not a single proven scam - well, how would there be one? Again: They are NOT providing any service other than listing exchange services! All they can do - and they of course also should do - is being careful of who they are listing!

Starting to accuse them and discussing a "possible" scam is a complete joke just because they are not using an escrow - I will be the first to support anything if they dont meet what they promise but guys, come on, nothing happened at all and whats worse: we are starting to flame each other for no reason. I really feel sorry for Royse being "attacked" this way...

I know I will now hear how I have no clue, I am a newbie bla bla bla - I dont mind, maybe just reflect what some of you guys are wasting nerves and energy on and then - most importantly - attacking people just because they dont agree with you. How can we start tagging each other when so far NOTHING has happened at all? All that trust and tag talk - yeah, do that as soon as you have a point - then again - do it whenever you want - but dont flame people who disagree with you!

Disclaimer: If we talked about a proven scam, some ponzi shit or sth like that - YES, I am with you 100%! Those guys have been around for years and ruining their reputation for a week´s signature campaign wouldnt make any sense. If they do so, yeah, stupid enough and we can then do all there is in our hands to protect people from using them! Last but not least: Such attitude leads to businesses staying away from building partnerships on here - if it was me, I would have cancelled the whole campaign btw...