Campaign managers acting as Escrow

[Timelord2067]

I'm keeping an open mind about this given julerz12 has contributed to the Known Alts thread.

I see no reason to change this trust feedback anytime soon:

Timelord2067

2022-01-22

Reference

Investigator with the "Known Alts of any-one - A User Generated List Mk III" team. (Delete)

Being the CM and holding onto the bag at the same time it would seem is a very risky venture.  Hopefully this gets sorted out quickly.

[nutildah]

I'm keeping an open mind about this given julerz12 has contributed to the Known Alts thread.

I see no reason to change this trust feedback anytime soon:

Timelord2067

2022-01-22

Reference

Investigator with the "Known Alts of any-one - A User Generated List Mk III" team. (Delete)

Because this user contributed to your thread, you believe this makes them trustworthy with trades?

The reason for changing the feedback would be because its not appropriate use of the trust system.

[AB de Royse777]

I'm keeping an open mind about this given julerz12 has contributed to the Known Alts thread.

I see no reason to change this trust feedback anytime soon:

Timelord2067

2022-01-22

Reference

Investigator with the "Known Alts of any-one - A User Generated List Mk III" team. (Delete)

Because this user contributed to your thread, you believe this makes them trustworthy with trades?

The reason for changing the feedback would be because its not appropriate use of the trust system.

Why do you question him. He has all his right to whatever he wants to do, doesn't he? // excuse my sarcasm

How would you explain it?

Poker Player

2023-01-07

Reference

To top it off, after all that happened in 2022, he has started 2023 by being temporarily banned for PM ad spam.

I should be asking everyone who have him in their trust or even in distrust list.

Poker Player's judgement is Trusted by:
1. Gianluca95 (Trust: +6 / =1 / -0) (185 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. examplens (Trust: +4 / =4 / -0) (1127 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
3. LFC_Bitcoin (Trust: +30 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (15) 6662 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
4. BitcoinGirl.Club (Trust: +1 / =3 / -0) (DT1! (4) 1314 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
5. CryptopreneurBrainboss (Trust: +18 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (12) 3206 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
6. lovesmayfamilis (Trust: +28 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (9) 3367 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
7. Apocollapse (Trust: neutral) (521 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

~Poker Player's judgement is Distrusted by:
1. Timelord2067 (Trust: +15 / =10 / -1) (DT1 (-1) 987 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. nutildah (Trust: +14 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (12) 4727 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
3. Bitcoin SV (Trust: #  +0 / =2 / -22) (233 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
4. Excimer (Trust: #  +0 / =3 / -7) (152 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

[naim027]

Why do you question him. He has all his right to whatever he wants to do, doesn't he? // excuse my sarcasm

How would you explain it?

He always asks LoyceV when he doubts the proper use of the feedback system.
So, I would like to mention @LoyceV if he wouldn't mind sharing his point of view.
Well, this could be off-topic here. But, All those things turned into a personal fight right now.
Like seriously, guys? This is a virtual forum, and we don't know each other personally. Why so personal?

[Maslate]

Actually, it's not a problem if the campaign manager will act as Escrow if that is the agreement between the company and the campaign manager.

Escrow in the sense is third party who is a party that secures funds in transaction between parties A & B. So this third party is tasked with securing funds that have been agreed between parties A & B and usually users who act as third parties can actually trusted. I know some managers can also be an escrow for other transacting parties, but if the manager receives and keeps the campaign budget in his wallet then I don't think he is acting as an escrow. It's a kind of campaign budget entrusted to the manager in advance.

I think you are right, sorry about my explanation but I surely understood what escrow is. My bad, I mixed up the Escrow service(which I believe he has) of Julerz and his campaign management services.

It's just said that this thing happens, whether it's his fault or due to his negligence, the amount lost is still his responsibility.

It is obviously his responsibility to secure all those budgets, and if he makes a mistake that makes all those budgets disappear then he has to cover all those losses. I don't blame julerz12 entirely for what happened, but it was a disgrace in the way it secured the campaign budget. He has to pay for it, of course because it will only affect his reputation as a manager in the short and long term.

Whatever his explanation is, it might be true or just a made up, bottom line he is responsible for the funds.

Still, my stance on his topic is that it's okay for a campaign manager to hold the funds of the campaign. Besides, we can never be sure, Escrow service from reliable members could also end to scam. You know, we are just humans, sometimes we make mistakes whether deliberately or not, still a mistake.

[Apocollapse]

Because this user contributed to your thread, you believe this makes them trustworthy with trades?

The reason for changing the feedback would be because its not appropriate use of the trust system.

Even he change his old feedback, it doesn't make any difference since he's currently not a DT member. Actually there's a one user who need to revise his feedback since he's a DT member.

One of the best scam buster on the forum.

How would you explain it?

Poker Player

2023-01-07

Reference

To top it off, after all that happened in 2022, he has started 2023 by being temporarily banned for PM ad spam.

If you ask to me does his feedback he leave on your profile is correct or not, I will say it's not correct.

But the thing is, he was leave an appropriate feedback which I think his recent feedback isn't really make any difference since if one person leave 2 negative feedbacks, it will count for 1.

I don't trust him because he was the face of Bitlucy on the forum, that ended being an exit cam. A couple of months after, he launched the project Casino Critique, dishonestly being behind the account in secret, and hiding it from potential investors and on top of that, covered up for scumbag-Naim027, while at the same time Naim027 downplayed the role Royse777 played in the Bitlucy scam.

Also considering if @Poker Player already change his feedback to neutral, it doesn't mean your account already clean since there's 2 users that still leave negative feedbacks. Based on my observations @Poker Player isn't a person who hard to change his feedback from negative to neutral.

Instead of making more drama, I think it's better for you to not easily get heated and focus to built your reputation. You've already manage multiple campaigns which mean, sooner or later you could be trusted like before.

[lovesmayfamilis]

after the FTX collapse, Binance and CMC launched reserves as an additional parameter for liquidity exchanges. Maybe we could have a similar condition here, the escrow must have a certain amount of reserves as a guarantee.

Even with such measures, a lot of things could still go wrong that would jeopardize the escrow. For starters, what if they got into an accident, got robed, or worse, died? These may seem far fetched but it can happen.
And if such condition is applied here, as yahoo already mentioned, probably only one or two users in this forum would qualify. If all funds from various bounty campaigns, signature campaigns are poured into them, they could easily be targeted not just online but in real-life as well. Quite scary when you think about it.

I was also disappointed when I read this news yesterday, and this is o e of the early big hack/scam story for the new year 2023.

Yep, but still, nothing beats this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5432665.0

It sounds like an excuse.  But I don't think that saying that it can happen to everyone is applicable here. Accidents on the road occur as well, sometimes due to the fault of both the pedestrian and the driver. But the biggest fault lies with the driver when he has a weapon in his hands that can lead to the death of people because the driver himself does not know the rules of driving.
I think you can understand it.

[AB de Royse777]

Instead of making more drama, I think it's better for you to not easily get heated and focus to built your reputation. You've already manage multiple campaigns which mean, sooner or later you could be trusted like before.

You think I am creating drama? Seriously.
How many times you see me going to people's trust page and leaving feedback, adding people in my trust list who I do not go along. If you really can not follow then please do not leave a generic response.

[LoyceV]

Even with such measures, a lot of things could still go wrong that would jeopardize the escrow. For starters, what if they got into an accident, got robed, or worse, died? These may seem far fetched but it can happen.

It's about reducing risks. Even if you use a hot wallet instead of your hardware wallet, you can still get hit by a bus. But if you don't get hit by a bus and lose your hot wallet, it helps if you can afford the loss.

For serious amounts, you can use multisig with multiple people. Forum funds now use a 3-of-5 multisig address.

He always asks LoyceV when he doubts the proper use of the feedback system.
So, I would like to mention @LoyceV if he wouldn't mind sharing his point of view.

It's off-topic here.

[nutildah]

Poker Player

2023-01-07

Reference

To top it off, after all that happened in 2022, he has started 2023 by being temporarily banned for PM ad spam.

I should be asking everyone who have him in their trust or even in distrust list.

2. nutildah (Trust: +14 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (12) 4727 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

I would address this in his thread where he mentioned me but it kind of on-topic for this thread seeing as how you are a campaign manager and I assume you've also been escrow at the same time before.

I see Poker Player changed this most recent red to a neutral but I disagree with his initial red on you if only for the reason that it wasn't supported by a reference link. Your reputation is obviously important to you on this forum and since you've been here for years longer than him, he owes the courtesy of at least supporting his negative trust with a reference link.

I'm generally wary of new-ish users (2020 reg date is new-ish IMO) who are quick to use their DT powers for reasons not entirely justified.

[Doan9269]

Should an escrow be liable for any loss of such funds and get tagged till such a repayment is done?

If we consider the risk associated with using a centralized exchange in performing escrow for our transactions and eventually they got hacked or went bankrupt obviously we have nothing to do about it because we cannot fight them back to recovering the lost funds, but in case of the campaign managers and their hiring companies this has to be an agreement they would have cone into symphony with before engaging on the deal of contract, with the recent happening i think others will learn and review or recheck their contract terms with the kind of managers they employed, but i think experience also matters here, it's not all about hiring a manager but those that can delivere upto task and has been here on the forum in charge of more than four signature campaigns over years and nothing got mixed up.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Last few days I was not online.

I, Poker Player and many other members were regular in SWG o SwC poker back in the start of pandemic. I can not remember when did I add him (I think few days ago I did a revise, too lazy to check) but if I added him then it's a must that he was accurate in his feedback giving. People changes especially when they start tasting some kind of authoritarianship. I hope this is not the case for Poker Player.

[Bounty Bro]

Should an escrow be liable for any loss of such funds and get tagged till such a repayment is done?

If we consider the risk associated with using a centralized exchange in performing escrow for our transactions and eventually they got hacked or went bankrupt obviously we have nothing to do about it because we cannot fight them back to recovering the lost funds, but in case of the campaign managers and their hiring companies this has to be an agreement they would have cone into symphony with before engaging on the deal of contract, with the recent happening i think others will learn and review or recheck their contract terms with the kind of managers they employed, but i think experience also matters here, it's not all about hiring a manager but those that can delivere upto task and has been here on the forum in charge of more than four signature campaigns over years and nothing got mixed up.

Escrow should always hold all funds in a personal wallet, never centralized exchange! Just remember FTX, centralized exchange can always go down. Even low risk should be avoided.
Problem is: if it's an Altcoin for escrow, if it's a shit project, where any token will lose any value, even escrow and personal wallet can't help! 

[Baofeng]

Coinomize will send the rewards themselves for which I am eternally grateful. I'm quite thankful that they still chose to constantly communicate despite what happened.

And since someone has bump this thread, it seems that this work around has been smooth for you and the campaign itself. And there are campaigns in the future who might do the same setup, or have someone hold the escrows.

So I guess everything is going to be ok with this two, it's up to the project themselves what setup they want.

Or if the campaign managers are going to offer this kind of setup for the project.