[SCAMMER] Quickseller/ ACCTseller sold me a hacked account

[zedicus]

Quickseller/ ACCTseller (they are both the same person) sold me this hero account a few months ago for 1.1 BTC. He assured me that the account was not hacked.

Until after the transaction, I find this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741302.0

Which is a dispute between the original owner (ownership is proven in the thread) and Quickseller. This is the equivalent of me buying a used car that was stated to have never been in a car accident and then finding out afterwards that the car had indeed been in a car accident.

As a result of this dispute, this account received numerous negative trust ratings and I have not been able to get it in a signature campaign since (the intended use). Therefore, I cannot make my investment back.

Quickseller REFUSES to take responsibility and does not want the account back (for obvious reasons).

Please ban these accounts:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=358020
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=357263

[1715086238]

1715086238

[1715086238]

1715086238

[1715086238]

1715086238

[1715086238]

1715086238

[Quickseller]

• Can you prove the account was actually purchased by you?
• Do you have proof of payment?
• Do you have any evidence that Quicksilver and ACCTseller are the same person?
• What specific term of our agreement was breached as a result of your discovery of this thread (the thread referenced in your OP)?
• Do you have any proof that you have actually applied to join a signature campaign?
• Why did not not publicly attempt to join a signature campaign as the rules of most/all signature campaigns state that you must do?
• Why would it be appropriate for me to "take" the account back?
• Why have you not taken my advice as to how to sell an account and attempt to do so?
• Can you provide any examples of an (alleged or not) scammer has been banned?
• Which specific forum rule are you accusing me of breaking that would cause me to deserve a ban?
• At which point was current ownership proven in the "bayuo" thread?

My Counterclaims

• There was no condition or term of any potential agreement that we have had that I have breached.
• I told you if you were able to point to a specific representation that turned out to be not true, or any agreement with you that I did not follow through on then I would refund you your money. You have not point to any of such.
• You recently left me negative trust, after which I sent you a message asking you to remove it, and I was met with a response that essentially was blackmail/extortion.
• You have previously made an empty threat on the "bayuo" thread saying that you would expose all of my inventory/accounts, which you did not have access to nor did you follow through on
• You claimed to be close to purchasing an account that is on default trust for the purpose of giving me and my accounts negative trust
• You have threatened by business (this goes hand and hand with the above blackmail claim)
• You have not publicly attempted to participate in any signature campaigns, nor did you claim payment the first month you owned the account when it was enrolled in the Prime Dice campaign, which sadly makes me conclude that you purchased the account with the intention of trying to scam someone.
• An account was recently purchased from me that likely pulled what was probably a "fake scam", which I believe was a failed attempt to make it look like one of my alt accounts was scamming, I speculate you were behind this*

Evidence will follow (*I will not provide evidence on this one for privacy reasons in the event that I am wrong about this)

[ACCTseller]

Seen that coming from 5 miles away.

What exactly did you "see coming"?

Does the OP want to offer any proof of his claims? The burden of proof is on the accuser. I can say that the majority of his claims are not true.

[Quickseller]

The below quote is from the "bayuo" thread. I have bolded the relevant part when zedicus publicly threatens to expose my accounts for sale:

Quicksellers is no longer responding. I really don't care who is right between bayuo or quicksellers, all I know is that I want my money back. I don't want to be involved in this.

What would be the proper process? Start a scam accusation thread? I know quicksellers has a few accounts so I will list them all for us to zap with negative rep.

This are the two PM's that I received with him claiming to be close to purchasing a default trust account with the intention of giving me negative trust.

You should remove the trust that you have left me.

All of the terms of any trade that we have done was met Can you provide evidence that I made a claim, representation, or agreed to a term that was not met? The result of free speech allows for anyone to make any invalid claim that they want and that is no reason to doubt any actual ownership of the account.

Zedicus is still able to be used in the way that it was marketed - for signature campaigns; if you were planning on using your account for some kind of scam and can no longer do so because it is a known sold account then shame on you for trying to scam. I am sad to say that I am fairly sure that it was the latter as you did not even attempt to claim payment on the prime dice signature campaign when you were eligible and have made no effort to participate in other signature campaigns since the PD campaign closed.

It has also been said my multiple administrators that evidence is not sufficient to substantiate the disputed ownership claim by bayuo, and that no action will be taken to revoke your ownership.

If you want to have any respect in the community and want to maintain your integrity then you should remove your trust. When you made the mistake of admitting to your account being a purchased account, I stuck up for you and made an argument to get the negative trust removed, which maintained the value of your account.

Actually I have tried getting on campaigns. Don't accuse me of scamming when you sold me an account which was tainted. YOU posted in that thread before I even purchased this account admitting it had been sold. Why don't you understand this.

If you will not refund me my BTC, will you help sell the account?

FYI I control multiple accounts with ad campaigns. I don't post personally but I take a cut from the income since I own the account.

PS. I've almost got hold of a trusted account which I plan to hit you with as well.

Additionally I find it suspicious (and likely untrue) that he "owns" multiple accounts that participate in signature campaigns, but he does not actually post. If it is true, then he is probably the cause of a lot of spam.This is when he threatened my business by saying that my business is "over"

That is because the payment was crypto dust. It is called personal messages, you know, what we are doing right now. I have been personal messaging campaign owners on whether they will accept this account or not.

You sell me a tainted account (which you don't want back) and then accuse me of being a scammer? Have you ever heard of consumer law? This account was not fit for sale. There was an ongoing dispute and you still decided to sell it. So DO NOT try and turn this around. I will bury you. I will make scam accusation thread about you and let the moderators decide.

Your shady account selling business is over.

Here is another example of when he threatened all of my accounts and my business:

YOU admitted the account was sold when he revealed YOUR message.

I'm making a scam accusation thread and labelling ALL of your accounts for negative rep.

Last chance before I destroy your business. Choose your next reply carefully.  Consumer law, read about it.

No more fucking around. Take responsibility.

Another threat:

I'm only giving you so many warnings out of respect for all of the hard work you have put into becoming reputable on this forum. What I reveal to people will destroy your business as hacked accounts are deal breakers.

Here is evidence that I gave him advice as to how to sell his account if that is what he wanted to do so:

I would like a refund. I do not want this tainted account, it is worthless to me. I purchased it on the conditions that it wasn't hacked. I have no idea who is telling the truth but I don't need the hassle.

Please send 1.1 BTC back to 18QYaBURm5Azpq1bC429U4L7fF6sJ4gz8Q

You can organize with the original owner to get BTC from him.

The account was not hacked. I do not issue refunds.

Like I said if you wish to sell the account back to bayuo then you are more then welcome to do so.

Also remember before you accept anything less then what you paid for the account from him that he is trying to get the upper hand above you, but so far has failed and will likely continue to fail. He has PMed many people asking them to give negative rep to the account, he has tried to get the account banned, but all to no avail.

If he really wants the account back as badly as he claims then he will pay you 1.1

You are welcome to sell it to him or anyone else at whatever price you choose (if you choose to sell it to someone else then you should create a "shill" account to sell it). I will not however be a party to the sale.

Bayuo does not want this account. Therefore I am asking you for a refund before I start dishing out negative rep myself.

When someone spends 1.1 BTC for an account, they are not expected to go through this. If you like, you can work with Bayuo to get the 1.1 BTC but it shouldn't be up to me. This is not my problem, you need to take responsibility (which you can expect in this type of business).

So I ask you one more time, please refund me now. This account has zero ROI since it will be kicked off the PD campaign.

Why would it be kicked from the PD campaign? I had PMed stunna when this fiasco started and he said that I would be good to go. You will only get kicked from signature campaigns if you have valid trusted negative trust on your profile (meaning your trust is red). I got tomatocage to remove his negative trust so your profile does not show any red trust.

You also diminished the value of the account when you admitted to it being sold.

If bayuo does not want the account anymore then I would suggest editing your last post to reflect as much and avoid that post in the future. You posting there only attracted attention to yourself.

You were aware that there are no refunds when you purchased the account. My policy on not issuing refunds will stand in this case.

Go to page 3 of the thread and you can clearly see where you admit to this being a sold account. Everyone knew after that and I only posted after I started receiving negative trust.

This is not simply me changing my mind, this is a breach of our terms. You need to refund me my money or I will take this further (on all of your accounts).

So if I message Stunna saying this is a purchased account and it has negative trust, he will still pay me?

i did not post anything on page 3 of the thread bayou created. If you are referring the pm that bayuo quoted then people would generally not take that as fact because anyone can type anything in a quote like that.

Your account does not have any "real" negative trust. Only trust from people on the default trust list really counts either way. The account has similar negative trust when payout was made last month and payment was received without issue.

They made cuts to the campaign that cut most members and the account was not cut due to the posts were of quality nature. In order to continue in the campaign similar quality posts would likely need to continue including posting posts outside the meta section. I would suggest posting more in the bitcoin discussion section and increasing your post length and engaging discussion in threads.

I am not able to take responsibility for other peoples actions nor am I able to pay for other peoples frauds who I did not endorse.

I also have no way of guaranteeing that bayuo did not actually buy the account back from you (knowing how he works he would likely try to buy it back at a discount and I wouldn't be surprised if he would approach me to try to scam me out of more money).

Don't sink as low as that bayuo retard and start playing his games on me. Obviously he didn't pay for the account. As proof, bitcoinben (my account) purchased this from you (or I should say your other 'ACCTseller' account).

Last chance before I start a thread on you. No more mucking around, I want my BTC back.

Here is more proof that I offered to help him sell the account:

You should remove the trust that you have left me.

All of the terms of any trade that we have done was met Can you provide evidence that I made a claim, representation, or agreed to a term that was not met? The result of free speech allows for anyone to make any invalid claim that they want and that is no reason to doubt any actual ownership of the account.

Zedicus is still able to be used in the way that it was marketed - for signature campaigns; if you were planning on using your account for some kind of scam and can no longer do so because it is a known sold account then shame on you for trying to scam. I am sad to say that I am fairly sure that it was the latter as you did not even attempt to claim payment on the prime dice signature campaign when you were eligible and have made no effort to participate in other signature campaigns since the PD campaign closed.

It has also been said my multiple administrators that evidence is not sufficient to substantiate the disputed ownership claim by bayuo, and that no action will be taken to revoke your ownership.

If you want to have any respect in the community and want to maintain your integrity then you should remove your trust. When you made the mistake of admitting to your account being a purchased account, I stuck up for you and made an argument to get the negative trust removed, which maintained the value of your account.

Actually I have tried getting on campaigns. Don't accuse me of scamming when you sold me an account which was tainted. YOU posted in that thread before I even purchased this account admitting it had been sold. Why don't you understand this.

If you will not refund me my BTC, will you help sell the account?

FYI I control multiple accounts with ad campaigns. I don't post personally but I take a cut from the income since I own the account.

You did not even claim payment on the PD signature campaign the first month that you owned the account, not have you tried to sign up for other signature campaigns publicly (and a public post is almost always required). You also have not really posted once you found out that bayuo essentially confirmed your account was purchased.

I will not sell the account under my name, but I have given you advice on how to sell it and can give you advice and guidance as to how you can potentially sell your account.

Please do not give me an empty threat of negative trusting my account. It is not difficult to get someone removed from default trust as it has happened several times in recent months and can easily happen again.

Upon the community's request I am "report" any of the above messages to an administrator who can confirm the authenticity of such PM's. Multiple quoted and discussed the first quoted post in this post.

If I left out any evidence of my above claims then post here and I will see what I can find.

[ACCTseller]

Seen that coming from 5 miles away.

What exactly did you "see coming"?

Does the OP want to offer any proof of his claims? The burden of proof is on the accuser. I can say that the majority of his claims are not true.

Account is hacked.
That alone is enough proof.

Right......"hacked"

This is a perfect example of why I don't want to restore accounts (for the most part).  While bayuo obviously did control the Zedicus account at one point, and is probably the original owner, there appears to be a pretty good reason he doesn't anymore (I won't elaborate for privacy reasons). Though there really is no way to be positive either way.

Exemplifies perfectly what I was saying the other day about signing addresses not being conclusive proof that the person signing *should* be in control of that account. 

Can we get any conformation from staff if they check ip logs in case of hacked accounts.

Yes, but it isn't conclusive proof anymore than signing an address is, just a piece of evidence. 

[zedicus]

Can you prove the account was actually purchased by you?
Do you have proof of payment?

Yes. Everything is in PM's from our purchase including the payment address.

Do you have any evidence that Quicksilver and ACCTseller are the same person?

Before I answer this. Do you publicly deny that ACCTseller is not your alternate account? If you don't deny this, why did you need to ask this question?

What specific term of our agreement was breached as a result of your discovery of this thread (the thread referenced in your OP)?

That whole thread is about Zedicus being a HACKED account. You assured me that this was not the case before purchase. Why do I want to give you money for YOUR baggage? I didn't want to be involved in this. IF I had known these details before purchase, I would have (like any other reasonable person) turned down the offer.

Do you have any proof that you have actually applied to join a signature campaign?
Why did not not publicly attempt to join a signature campaign as the rules of most/all signature campaigns state that you must do?

Yes. Because I have pm'd the operators before applying to see whether this tainted account can or cannot be used in signature campaigns.

Why would it be appropriate for me to "take" the account back?

Simple. You lied to me to get a sale. You did not tell me this account was under dispute with the original owner. No one would have purchased this account if they had known. Should I make a poll about this?

Why have you not taken my advice as to how to sell an account and attempt to do so?

Because at the end of the day, I couldn't bring myself to sell this account. Who would want it?

Can you provide any examples of an (alleged or not) scammer has been banned?
Which specific forum rule are you accusing me of breaking that would cause me to deserve a ban?

The same rule that applies if I sell iPhone 6's in the marketplace and ship poo instead.

At which point was current ownership proven in the "bayuo" thread?

The part where he signs a message. Instead of asking stupid questions, go and read the thread.

[zedicus]

Thank you.

I simply want my money back. Any reasonable person in the same position would not have purchased this account if they knew it was under dispute by the original owner. Plain and simple. Yet Quickseller/ ACCTseller continues to spew defensive crap.

I gave him months to make things right by me. He was just hoping that it would all go away. My hand was forced.

[Quickseller]

Can you prove the account was actually purchased by you?
Do you have proof of payment?

Yes. Everything is in PM's from our purchase including the payment address.

Please provide proof in public. If you want to make a claim then the burden is on you to prove your case, not on me to prove my innocence. Have you ever hear of innocent until proven guilty?

Do you have any evidence that Quicksilver and ACCTseller are the same person?

Before I answer this. Do you publicly deny that ACCTseller is not your alternate account? If you don't deny this, why did you need to ask this question?

See my above comment. If you cannot prove a claim then you should not make such claim. I do not need to deny anything, it is on you to prove what you say is true.

What specific term of our agreement was breached as a result of your discovery of this thread (the thread referenced in your OP)?

That whole thread is about Zedicus being a HACKED account. You assured me that this was not the case before purchase. Why do I want to give you money for YOUR baggage? I didn't want to be involved in this. IF I had known these details before purchase, I would have (like any other reasonable person) turned down the offer.

Where is the proof that zedicus is a hacked account? Both theymos and BadBear have said (on reddit and the "bayuo" thread that there is not evidence of such to support giving the account back to bayuo. They have more information that anyone else on here has. The only proof that I have seen is something that would indicate that the account was previously owned by bayuo.

As a result of freedom of speech, anyone is able to make any claim they wish, despite the lack of truth to such claim

Do you have any proof that you have actually applied to join a signature campaign?
Why did not not publicly attempt to join a signature campaign as the rules of most/all signature campaigns state that you must do?

Yes. Because I have pm'd the operators before applying to see whether this tainted account can or cannot be used in signature campaigns.

Provide such proof.

Why would it be appropriate for me to "take" the account back?

Simple. You lied to me to get a sale. You did not tell me this account was under dispute with the original owner. No one would have purchased this account if they had known. Should I make a poll about this?

Did you specifically inquire about a dispute of ownership? If so then what was my response? Please provide proof.

If you did not make such inquiry then what statement did I make that was a lie? Please provide proof.

You cannot rely on hypothetical situations to support a claim.

Why have you not taken my advice as to how to sell an account and attempt to do so?

Because at the end of the day, I couldn't bring myself to sell this account. Who would want it?

Why did you ask for help selling it only days ago? What changed between then and now that caused you to not want to sell the account?

Someone who is wanting to earn money by posting in a signature campaign who is interested in Bitcoin would want the account.

Can you provide any examples of an (alleged or not) scammer has been banned?
Which specific forum rule are you accusing me of breaking that would cause me to deserve a ban?

The same rule that applies if I sell iPhone 6's in the marketplace and ship poo instead.

A search for "poo" in the market place rules and guidelines comes up with no results. A similar search in the Unoffical list of official forum rules thread shows several results discussing pools, but nothing regarding "poo"

Please provide a link that proves I broke a forum rule (if one were to assume your allegations are true).

At which point was current ownership proven in the "bayuo" thread?

The part where he signs a message. Instead of asking stupid questions, go and read the thread.

At which point was current
ownership proven? A signed message does not proof current ownership, it only proves previous ownership. If ownership was proven then how/why are you still in possession of the account?

[Quickseller]

Also please address my blackmail/extortion claims against you.

Do you deny that the messages I published are accurate? Do you deny the messages I published would be classified as blackmail/extortion? If so then please make an argument.

If you admit to blackmailing me then what incentive would I have to act honestly with you (if one were to hypothetically assume that I did in fact owe you money)?

[zedicus]

Quickseller, I do not have time for your games. To the ACTUAL POINT of this thread.

Did you sell me an account that you knew was being disputed by the owner (or someone who had control over this account in the past)? YES

Would a reasonable person in my position still purchase an account with this extra information that you purposefully withheld? NO

If you do not want to make this right, you need a scam tag. People need to know that you have dishonest business practices.

I think it is pretty fucken obvious that I own this account (since I am posting from it), so stop with the games and give me a REFUND!

[zedicus]

This is how I read Quickseller's responses:

Do you have a cat?

Can you show me proof of this cat?

Is the cat brown and orange?

Do you like cats?

Can you provide proof that you like cats?

Do you like cats more than dogs?

Do cats live longer than horses?

Have you ever seen a cat ride a horse?

If so, prove it?

TLDR - Stop asking stupid questions. I thought this topic was very clear. You were dishonest
(FRAUD) and now I want my money back. Your whole business revolves around honesty, why let this spill out? You're only ruining yourself with your relentless text vomit.

[Vortex20000]

This is how I read Quickseller's responses:

Do you have a cat?

Can you show me proof of this cat?

Is the cat brown and orange?

Do you like cats?

Can you provide proof that you like cats?

Do you like cats more than dogs?

Do cats live longer than horses?

Have you ever seen a cat ride a horse?

If so, prove it?

TLDR - Stop asking stupid questions. I thought this topic was very clear. You were dishonest
(FRAUD) and now I want my money back. Your whole business revolves around honesty, why let this spill out? You're only ruining yourself with your relentless text vomit.

If I had the money to spare I'd pay you for that. I had to choice but to LOL when I read this...

[marcotheminer]

I have not been able to get it in a signature campaign since (the intended use). Therefore, I cannot make my investment back.

You still can. All negatives you've received are untrusted so all signature campaigns are still going to accept you.

So this isn't a valid arguement.

[u9y42]

I have not been able to get it in a signature campaign since (the intended use). Therefore, I cannot make my investment back.

You still can. All negatives you've received are untrusted so all signature campaigns are still going to accept you.

So this isn't a valid arguement.

That's a pretty broad generalization; different signature campaign managers look for different things in their participants, but I wouldn't be surprised if most would be weary of accepting someone with what is potentially a stolen account - I know I would be, and would likely rather not have anything to do with it, in order to avoid it reflecting negatively on my campaign.

EDIT: but give it a try zedicus - LuckyBit is currently open.

[noma]

Wait I am confused, do you mean Quickseller or Quicksilver?

[marcotheminer]

I have not been able to get it in a signature campaign since (the intended use). Therefore, I cannot make my investment back.

You still can. All negatives you've received are untrusted so all signature campaigns are still going to accept you.

So this isn't a valid arguement.

That's a pretty broad generalization; different signature campaign managers look for different things in their participants, but I wouldn't be surprised if most would be weary of accepting someone with what is potentially a stolen account - I know I would be, and would likely rather not have anything to do with it, in order to avoid it reflecting negatively on my campaign.

EDIT: but give it a try zedicus - LuckyBit is currently open.

I can tell you right now that luckybit and gawminers would accept him. So would a few others.

[gkv9]

@marcotheminer,
If he would have applied for the bit-x campaign, he would have been selected in it?

Also, as Bayuo has proved that the account "zedicus" belongs to him only, will Quickseller give him the funds he received for hacking his account, i.e., BTC1.1 (as shown in the evidences above), or does "zedicus" guarantee that if he gets a refund from Quickseller, will he then transfer the ownership of this account back to Bayuo?

Reference: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741302

[LOBSTER]

Quickseller should show a screenshot of the PM in which you can see the payment address for the account. Zedicus too.

After Zedicus signs this address to prove that he is the real buyer.

[hilariousandco]

Quickseller, I do not have time for your games. To the ACTUAL POINT of this thread.

Did you sell me an account that you knew was being disputed by the owner (or someone who had control over this account in the past)? YES

Didn't this only come to light after it was sold? And this is the problem with buying and selling accounts which both buyers and sellers should be aware of the risks involved. And as Marco said the account isn't ruined because it doesn't have defaulttrust feedback (though the longer you drag this out the more likely it is to recieve some especially since you're now issuing threats).

[Quickseller]

Quickseller, I do not have time for your games. To the ACTUAL POINT of this thread.

I don't think it is too much to ask that you prove what you are claiming. In both criminal and civil litigation the burden is on the person bringing the claim (in this case you) to prove their case. 

Did you sell me an account that you knew was being disputed by the owner (or someone who had control over this account in the past)? YES

No, I deny this. There was a dispute over the ownership of the zedicus account at one point, however it was resolved on 16 Aug, 2014 at 2:59 PM UDT. There was no additional evidence presented by bayuo after this time. See the below quote:

This is a perfect example of why I don't want to restore accounts (for the most part).  While bayuo obviously did control the Zedicus account at one point, and is probably the original owner, there appears to be a pretty good reason he doesn't anymore (I won't elaborate for privacy reasons). Though there really is no way to be positive either way.

Exemplifies perfectly what I was saying the other day about signing addresses not being conclusive proof that the person signing *should* be in control of that account. 

Can we get any conformation from staff if they check ip logs in case of hacked accounts.

Yes, but it isn't conclusive proof anymore than signing an address is, just a piece of evidence. 

(bold done by me). Unless you can prove that you purchased the account from me prior to this time then you have no case. Even if you can prove you purchased the account before this time any harm that you had suffered was reversed when the dispute was resolved.

Would a reasonable person in my position still purchase an account with this extra information that you purposefully withheld? NO

The fact that a reasonable person may or may not want to purchase the account is irrelevant. In order to withhold information, such information needs to be first requested. I deny that you requested any information about a dispute of account ownership. You have provided no such proof and appear unwilling to provide such proof. 

If you do not want to make this right, you need a scam tag. People need to know that you have dishonest business practices.

You are entitled to your own opinion. There is nothing to make right.

I think it is pretty fucken obvious that I own this account (since I am posting from it), so stop with the games and give me a REFUND!

The whole basis of your claim is that you are saying the zedicus account was hacked and stolen from the original owner. If you are saying that the fact you are able to post from your account proves ownership then you invalidate your claim the ownership of the account even could be under dispute.

I have not been able to get it in a signature campaign since (the intended use). Therefore, I cannot make my investment back.

You still can. All negatives you've received are untrusted so all signature campaigns are still going to accept you.

So this isn't a valid arguement.

Right. Plus even if you have default negative trust you can participate in bit mixer and Bitcoin Scratchticket.

Also you have claimed that you have tried to join signature campaigns via PM, but have provided no proof of such.

Additionally according to this post another account ( Pierre11) whose ownership is much more questionable received payment from the GAW campaign. Here is the scam accusation claiming the account was stolen. At one point it is even admitted that the account was given to the incorrect person.

@marcotheminer,
If he would have applied for the bit-x campaign, he would have been selected in it?

Also, as Bayuo has proved that the account "zedicus" belongs to him only, will Quickseller give him the funds he received for hacking his account, i.e., BTC1.1 (as shown in the evidences above), or does "zedicus" guarantee that if he gets a refund from Quickseller, will he then transfer the ownership of this account back to Bayuo?

Reference: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741302

This is libel. bayuo has not proved that he is the current owner, nor has it been proven that I hacked the account. I have provided evidence to the contrary.