Bitscalper.com Threat Level

[stochastic]

As posted here.  What is your trust level of bitscalper.com.  I think this idea of putting levels of trust around services that use Bitcoin is a good idea.  I changed it to a "Trust Level" instead of "Threat Level" to make it more positive.  Maybe a service can or is being made to do this exact thing.  

If you say it has a low threat level then explain why you feel so.  

If you feel it has a high threat level then explain how they or someone else could gain your trust.

[bittenbob]

0 - I don't trust assholes

Especially when their stories don't add up. If they were trading with the volume they said all exchanges would equalize instantly. He continues to insult everyone and that should give you some insight into what type of a business person he is.

[Coinabul]

"Give me your coins and I'll make you rich!"

Too good to be true?
I think so.

[stochastic]

For the record this thread is not an attack on bitscalper.  It is an honest attempt to gauge the trust in bitscalper.

I rated them at 5.  I don't have a lot of trust in them, but I hope they are not a scam and I think they can improve.  Everything has risks and giving your money to someone with a high risk but low reward is not good sense.  If they had a Trust Level of 7 or 8, I think their current rate of return would allow me to put my money there.

Other things I don't trust them on is their business model.  How long will it last?  What happens if they lose money, will I also lose money?  Do I still get compensated if their server goes down?  Those are questions that they should address.

Trust is not set in stone.  If those things are addressed then I would consider parking some bitcoins there for storage.

[Matthew N. Wright]

If you feel it has a high threat level then explain how they or someone else could gain your trust.

• Completely anonymous
• No accountability
• Reckless/careless handling of customer funds
• Excuses own behavior instead of working to fix problems
• Continuously pushes back dates with more conversations about new endeavors to sidetrack
• Talks behind others' backs and lies

I do not trust his website, and although it pains me to say this (I was absolutely the last in my organization to agree, and I put up a very long fight about it too) I have no reason to believe he is not a scammer.

[mav]

0 - the service on offer is entirely feasible. The manner in which it has been offered is so opaque that it can't possibly be the service that they state to offer.

[Sargasm]

<shrug> I made a few coins, withdrew my balance.  The withdrawl took... uhm about 10 hours.  58btc.  Letting my little nest of coins grow to see what comes of it.  No biggie either way.

[bittenbob]

I think we all know who voted 10.

[Sargasm]

6

[Sargasm]

Ooooohhhh.

Yes. You're probably right.

[xepera]

6

If there comes more proof from Mr. Bitscalper i'll probably put more BTC back in there. By now i got my money out of there.

[chsados]

<shrug> I made a few coins, withdrew my balance.  The withdrawl took... uhm about 10 hours.  58btc.  Letting my little nest of coins grow to see what comes of it.  No biggie either way.

if you want to throw away bitcoins send them my way, they could really help with groceries and rent! 

[Bro]

obviously zero

[Vandroiy]

obviously zero

I'm working on a formalization of trust for Bitcoin software products. If defined as a measure of how much I trust someone with, trust of an unknown party should be either exactly zero or some communication minimum epsilon-like thing that is really very small. Much smaller than 1 BTC in any case. Otherwise, we invite scammers, which is not a good idea.

I have no information about Bitscalper on which I would base trust, so I voted 0. That's not an insult, just the formal response that I know nothing about them, and therefore would not give them my coins.

[bracek]

1

benefit of the doubt

[Ente]

<1>

1) Show us, or a trusted member, that a working infrastructure exists
    (in fact I bet some parts of it are GPL, so *have* to be published anyway!)

2) Show exactly what is going on: Gained %, total invested sum etc

3) Then, list what exactly is going on: "10:51 buying at MtGox x$ for y$/BTC, 10:52 selling at Tradehill a$ for b$/BTC"


Then, with 1-3 visible, I at least trust you that you do what you claim to do.
This is not to say I immediately trust you to not run away with the whole sum eventually.
Only time (and transparency) can esthablish that trust. And that is totally out of the picture if 1-3 are not there first.

Ente

[bitscalper]

I offered Matthew to eventually verify part of our codebase and waiting for someone from the trusted members pool to contact me. Withdrawals are processing correctly.

[rebuilder]

1. I guess I always want to have the option of having an even lower opinion of something.

Actually I'm pretty neutral about it. No trust sums it up, but I think you can go lower than that, into active distrust. There is a difference...

Maybe the scale should be more like:

5: implicit trust.

0: no trust.

-5: It's a scam.

[Matthew N. Wright]

1. I guess I always want to have the option of having an even lower opinion of something.

Actually I'm pretty neutral about it. No trust sums it up, but I think you can go lower than that, into active distrust. There is a difference...

Maybe the scale should be more like:

5: implicit trust.

0: no trust.

-5: It's a scam.

+1

That's a good way to go I think.

[naima53]

my humble 2 cents ... SCAM SCAM SCAM AGAIN AND SCAM. If I'm wrong - where is the source code of the algorithm? (well, at least about how it works ...example ..??)  I know how to scalp for a small sum, but it is not possible to do with 500, 1,000, and more ...