Redsn0w, negative/neutral/or no trust due to Escrow negligence?

[michaeladair]

*What he said here*.

Uhm, #1 I removed the negative trust not because you called it Extortion, but because I made this topic and it wasn't necessary after.

You directly threatened me and saw that your threat did not work. If you can can find a different definition of extortion that does not match what you did then I would be wiling to concede on that point, but I don't think you can.

I realized what I did was threatening, but when I asked Redsn0w about the situation he said you ignored his messages and didn't reply. So I took the matters into my hands because I thought you'd listen to an outside source. Sorry if you felt insecure about the threat, I'm sorry....

[hilariousandco]

PS: I am doing this as a friend of Redsn0w and because I don't believe he is at the wrong in this matter.

It does seem like a conflict of interest if he's your friend and it's arguable as to whether redsnow is deserved of this trust but he did do something wrong regardless and I think he lucked out greatly on the situation. I think it was only a matter of time before something like this happened and could've been much worse and we never got to find out what red ultimately would have done had the account been lost. Redsnow stated a couple of times that he he himself didn't know what he would do if BadBear hadn't've of stepped in and couldn't answer whether he would've paid back the money which is a bit disturbing since he is meant to be guaranteeing it. That being said, he did close his escrow of his own accord which showed maturity but it also seems that he may start his escrow again at some point in the future which may not be a good idea for reasons already stated and in that case the feedback may be a good warning for people to use caution. The trust currently doesn't leave him marked as untrustworthy either but an orange warning which may by apt for the reason just stated.

[Quickseller]

I removed my negative because redsn0w said he would no longer act as escrow, so I didn't see it as necessary. I have seen reports/posts that this is not the case, but haven't had time to look into it.

He is still holding funds for a signature campaign , just paid out to participants today and there is no mention of him returning funds to the owner of the site nor that he is going to resign. Per the OP of the campaign he is holding funds in 1GkgLFg9YVyvLzKbsipzJJjy5r33mpv4ki and per the blockchain there is ~.46 BTC in the address.

Let the ones that are being hurt by the person to be giving out negative trust. Not an outsider.
I know that sounds a little Hypocritical, but my point still stands.

That is not how the trust system works. The other parties involved may not be high profile enough of users for what they claim to matter. Look at Vod's untrusted feedback. How many times has he scammed according to his untrusted feedback - probably 20......how many times has he actually scammed - probably zero.

I realized what I did was threatening, but when I asked Redsn0w about the situation he said you ignored his messages and didn't reply. So I took the matters into my hands because I thought you'd listen to an outside source. Sorry if you felt insecure about the threat, I'm sorry....

I didn't feel insecure about your threat. I knew that any feedback left under that basis would not be taken seriously. In my eyes, anyone who leaves negative trust for "trust abuse" (which is essentially what you were claiming) should not have any of their trust reports relied upon

He is still holding funds for a signature campaign , just paid out to participants today and there is no mention of him returning funds to the owner of the site nor that he is going to resign. Per the OP of the campaign he is holding funds in 1GkgLFg9YVyvLzKbsipzJJjy5r33mpv4ki and per the blockchain there is ~.46 BTC in the address.

Read the post above  yours ...

Yes and also for the FINDCoin project , but before my mistake not after.The transparency is the first thing , I didn't make nothing wrong it was only the  mistake (generated by me) that "ruined" me.

You have funds for two different escrow projects in a single address? Are both parties you are holding money for aware of this? Are the participants in your signature campaign aware of this? If there are no funds in the escrow address to cover signature payments (the only money left is for the FINDCoin project) then participants would keep their signature up under the impression you have enough money to pay when you really do not

[moreia_alt]

I think it is fair that the trust rating should be removed once the escrow service in my deal is completed and sealed.
Does anyone else agree with this?

[redsn0w]

@Quickseller as I told you I'm not friend of michaeladair . So at the end Could you change the feedback to neutral ? I think you don't trust me , but I'm still receiving pm to make as escrow and obviously my reply was all the time:

I'm sorry I don't provide anymore my escrow service here in the forum.

All the bad situation has been "recovered" and is it a valid point for your feedback ? I think the feedback was right if  I went away from the forum or "worst" the account  had not been recovered.

PS: I am doing this as a friend of Redsn0w and because I don't believe he is at the wrong in this matter.

It does seem like a conflict of interest if he's your friend and it's arguable as to whether redsnow is deserved of this trust but he did do something wrong regardless and I think he lucked out greatly on the situation. I think it was only a matter of time before something like this happened and could've been much worse and we never got to find out what red ultimately would have done had the account been lost. Redsnow stated a couple of times that he he himself didn't know what he would do if BadBear hadn't've of stepped in and couldn't answer whether he would've paid back the money which is a bit disturbing since he is meant to be guaranteeing it. That being said, he did close his escrow of his own accord which showed maturity but it also seems that he may start his escrow again at some point in the future which may not be a good idea for reasons already stated and in that case the feedback may be a good warning for people to use caution. The trust currently doesn't leave him marked as untrustworthy either but an orange warning which may by apt for the reason just stated.

I have not start nothing , I'm continue to manage  the sig. campaign as before and I've asked them if they want me as "manager" and they said : yes.

[--Encrypted--]

I think it is fair that the trust rating should be removed once the escrow service in my deal is completed and sealed.
Does anyone else agree with this?

there, the core of this problem has spoken.

I do agree that it should. I don't see any problem as long as redsn0w doesn't open up another escrow service in the near future

[redsn0w]

...
You have funds for two different escrow projects in a single address? Are both parties you are holding money for aware of this? Are the participants in your signature campaign aware of this? If there are no funds in the escrow address to cover signature payments (the only money left is for the FINDCoin project) then participants would keep their signature up under the impression you have enough money to pay when you really do not

Yes the know everything , and as you didn't  do.. they have reasoned . No, obviously the FIND  bounty address  is :

FmEqKohExKEgj7oFEKG7f9rh2AnSfSKF37   

For the question about the signature campaign , the 0.46 btc cover one week & more . Obviously if the funds don't cover the week I will pay from my own btc.


Please ,  be wise. Thanks again , for the reply.

~ @Quickseller , Can I ask you here in public one thing ?

[Quickseller]

...
You have funds for two different escrow projects in a single address? Are both parties you are holding money for aware of this? Are the participants in your signature campaign aware of this? If there are no funds in the escrow address to cover signature payments (the only money left is for the FINDCoin project) then participants would keep their signature up under the impression you have enough money to pay when you really do not

Yes the know everything , and as you didn't  do.. they have reasoned . No, obviously the FIND  bounty address  is :

FmEqKohExKEgj7oFEKG7f9rh2AnSfSKF37  
For the question about the signature campaign , the 0.46 btc cover one week & more . Obviously if the funds don't cover the week I will pay from my own btc.

You are going to pay from your own money if they don't give you enough? I would think it would be more wise to warn them that you might not have enough money to cover all the payments and how much you have. I somewhat think that statement was made because you thought that is what I wanted to hear

~ @Quickseller , Can I ask you here in public one thing ?

yes

[hilariousandco]

I have not start nothing , I'm continue to manage  the sig. campaigna as before and I've aske them if they want me as "manager" and they said : yes.

I said may start in the future and you're still currently offering services regardless. Do you plan to keep doing so after the terms expire of these current jobs or are you planning to restart your service in the future because this is the concern?

[redsn0w]

You are going to pay from your own money if they don't give you enough? I would think it would be more wise to warn them that you might not have enough money to cover all the payments and how much you have. I somewhat think that statement was made because you thought that is what I wanted to hear

7 Newbie       : 700 * 0,000045 = 0.0315 BTC
4 Jr. member :  400 * 0,00009  =  0.036 BTC
9 Member      :  900 * 0,000175 = 0,1575 BTC
10 11 F. member : 1100 * 0,000275 = 0.3025  BTC
4 5 Sr. member : 500 *  0,000275 =  0,1375  BTC
============================
                                     total  =  0,665  BTC

It is the max. payout in one week for the actual enrolled users. They have yet to send me  more funds for this week , maybe tomorrow I will check the address .
                                             

~ @Quickseller , Can I ask you here in public one thing ?

yes

If I don't trust you , should I leave you a negative feedback ? Is this how the trust system works now ?

..
I said may start in the future and you're still currently offering services regardless. Do you plan to keep doing so after the terms expire of these current jobs or are you planning to restart your service in the future because this is the concern?

Obviously not, I'm trying to finish this two "escrow" services and  when the  campaign and findcoin project will finish  I will stop ( and maybe one day  I will restart , but not for deal involved forum accounts .. it is not secure and not fairness).

Oh I forgot , I'm still holding the moreia's account in collateral  ... nobody   remembered it.

[Quickseller]

~ @Quickseller , Can I ask you here in public one thing ?

yes

If I don't trust you , should I leave you a negative feedback ? Is this how the trust system works now ?

The trust system is not moderated. You are allowed to leave negative trust feedback for any reason (or no reason). If you look at my untrusted feedback, you will notice that I have been trolled for various reasons via my feedback. If you leave someone negative feedback for the sole reason that you do not trust them then others will likely not trust your feedback reports.

EDIT: to clarify my previous statement regarding not trusting you: this is not the main reason why I left my feedback, it does play a minor role but the overriding factor is how you handled the escrow transaction and your initial reaction when it was uncertain that you would be able to recover the account.

[redsn0w]

~ @Quickseller , Can I ask you here in public one thing ?

yes

If I don't trust you , should I leave you a negative feedback ? Is this how the trust system works now ?

The trust system is not moderated. You are allowed to leave negative trust feedback for any reason (or no reason). If you look at my untrusted feedback, you will notice that I have been trolled for various reasons via my feedback. If you leave someone negative feedback for the sole reason that you do not trust them then others will likely not trust your feedback reports.

Do you think your feedback is "right" ? Why don't change it to neutral as the other users done ?  I think I don't deserve the negative feedback , it is this the problem.

I'm not offering more new escrow service here , and it is obviously if one want deal with me he has to check my history profile ( as all the users make to the other users before start  a deal).

EDIT: to clarify my previous statement regarding not trusting you: this is not the main reason why I left my feedback, it does play a minor role but the overriding factor is how you handled the escrow transaction and your initial reaction when it was uncertain that you would be able to recover the account.

So is this the reason ? Only my attitude I was very tired in that moment... it was not a simple situation , but now it is not a valid reason ... I've admitted my mistake and account has been recovered.

Could you please think again about the negative feedback ? Maybe it is a right reason change it to *neutral*.

[hilariousandco]

If I don't trust you , should I leave you a negative feedback ? Is this how the trust system works now ?

If it's justifiable and there is genuine concern, but if it isn't the feedback will very likely get brought up here and the reasoning questioned much like this thread now. If people abuse the feedback system over personal issues it usually comes back to bite them.

..
I said may start in the future and you're still currently offering services regardless. Do you plan to keep doing so after the terms expire of these current jobs or are you planning to restart your service in the future because this is the concern?

Obviously not, I'm trying to finish this two "escrow" services and  when the  campaign and findcoin project will finish  I will stop ( and maybe one day  I will restart , but not for deal involved forum accounts .. it is not secure and not fairness).

It's not obvious and it's still a concern that you are still considering the escrow once this all blows over. Just because you won't do accounts anymore isn't the problem. What happens if you screw up on something else and make an even costlier mistake? The issue here was your error not that accounts are insecure (they're pretty secure once handled right).

[Quickseller]

~ @Quickseller , Can I ask you here in public one thing ?

yes

If I don't trust you , should I leave you a negative feedback ? Is this how the trust system works now ?

The trust system is not moderated. You are allowed to leave negative trust feedback for any reason (or no reason). If you look at my untrusted feedback, you will notice that I have been trolled for various reasons via my feedback. If you leave someone negative feedback for the sole reason that you do not trust them then others will likely not trust your feedback reports.

Do you think your feedback is "right" ? Why don't change it to neutral as the other users done ?  I think I don't deserve the negative feedback , it is this the problem.

I'm not offering more new escrow service here , and it is obviously if one want deal with me he has to check my history profile ( as all the users make to the other users before start  a deal).

Yes I believe my feedback is right. You have asked me many times, and I was threatened with negative feedback to remove it. Trust me if there was a doubt that it was right I would have removed it a long time ago and admitted my mistake.

My trust rating for you is not going to stop anyone from trading with you. At the very most it would cause someone to want to use escrow while trading with you, however even the most reputable people are willing to accept escrow

edit: I personally think the people who have left neutral feedback is incorrect

[redsn0w]

....
If it's justifiable and there is genuine concern, but if it isn't the feedback will very likely get brought up here and the reasoning questioned much like this thread now. If people abuse the feedback system over personal issues it usually comes back to bite them.

In this case his negative feedback is not right , as moreia told (he was involved in "first  row").

It's not obvious and it's still a concern that you are still considering the escrow once this all blows over. Just because you won't do accounts anymore isn't the problem. What happens if you screw up on something else and make an even costlier mistake? The issue here was your error not that accounts are insecure (they're pretty secure once handled right).

I'm waiting the funds , if  tomorrow will not arrive  I will post in the signature campaign topic that the funds will not cover all the 100 posts during the week.

...
Yes I believe my feedback is right. You have asked me many times, and I was threatened with negative feedback to remove it. Trust me if there was a doubt that it was right I would have removed it a long time ago and admitted my mistake.

My trust rating for you is not going to stop anyone from trading with you. At the very most it would cause someone to want to use escrow while trading with you, however even the most reputable people are willing to accept escrow

edit: I personally think the people who have left neutral feedback is incorrect

I think the negative feedback was right if I went away from the run or "bad"  I've lost  forever the moreia's account , but this is not the case. I'm still here , and the account was recovered.


]I didn't ask him to put a negative feedback to you , it was his decision.

[SaltySpitoon]

I dont think feedback either way is necessary. We would have had to have seen his actions if the account was not recovered, and the loan was not paid. I was an escrow agent for a long while and luckily never had an issue, but if the escrow agent messes up, and something goes wrong, it is on them. If the account had not been recovered, and the loan not paid, redsn0w would have had to repay the loan. Thats why escrow agents charge fees and ask for tips, its to cover their liability. Since that is not the case, theres no reason to leave feedback either way. It would be positive feedback if he paid the loan as per his escrow agent obligation if the lendee ran off and the account was no longer secure, it could be neutral now I suppose if you wish, and it would be negative if redsn0w had not paid the loan if the account was lost and the lendee ran off.

Honestly, probably the most valuable information that could have come out of this, is to see how redsn0w handled something going wrong. Not really a big deal as far as how it turned out.

*Edit* I'm not going to change my wording around in my original post, but I will mention here, that feedback is fine, but I don't think there is enough info for a Trust call.

[Beastlymac]

How I see it all feedback in the trust system is at the discretion of the person leaving it. For example if you wouldnt trust someone with your btc after a situation has unfolded then you're entitled to leave that as a form of feedback. Preferably the situation is an interaction with you but it can be an interaction that is not made directly with you. Although now that neutral feedback has been brought in it may be a good idea to consider it more.

[redsn0w]

I dont think feedback either way is necessary. We would have had to have seen his actions if the account was not recovered, and the loan was not paid. I was an escrow agent for a long while and luckily never had an issue, but if the escrow agent messes up, and something goes wrong, it is on them. If the account had not been recovered, and the loan not paid, redsn0w would have had to repay the loan. Thats why escrow agents charge fees and ask for tips, its to cover their liability. Since that is not the case, theres no reason to leave feedback either way. It would be positive feedback if he paid the loan as per his escrow agent obligation if the lendee ran off and the account was no longer secure, it could be neutral now I suppose if you wish, and it would be negative if redsn0w had not paid the loan if the account was lost and the lendee ran off.

Honestly, probably the most valuable information that could have come out of this, is to see how redsn0w handled something going wrong. Not really a big deal as far as how it turned out.

How I see it all feedback in the trust system is at the discretion of the person leaving it. For example if you wouldnt trust someone with your btc after a situation has unfolded then you're entitled to leave that as a form of feedback. Preferably the situation is an interaction with you but it can be an interaction that is not made directly with you. Although now that neutral feedback has been brought in it may be a good idea to consider it more.

Thanks for yours opinion , it is appreciated. Now BedBear left me negative feedback , for continuing the two (3) escrow services  [ sig. campaign - FIND , moreia's account). My only mistake/error was  to not change/hide the email ... I don't have problem to hold the funds or other type of "deals".

[hilariousandco]

Do you think your feedback is "right" ? Why don't change it to neutral as the other users done ?  I think I don't deserve the negative feedback , it is this the problem.

I'm not offering more new escrow service here , and it is obviously if one want deal with me he has to check my history profile ( as all the users make to the other users before start  a deal).

You're not offering them currently but have admitted you may in the future and I think it's very likely you will, and in that case the feedback is an apt warning. What he wrote seems accurate and fair:

Refused to take personal responsibility when he messed up an transaction he was handling escrow for. The situation resolved itself because of a policy exception by a forum administrator.

He may be a honest person however should not be trusted to hold funds for others nor to handle any kind of escrow.

I agree with what he said and think you're likely a decent person but you did refuse to answer certain questions which makes me question your suitability as an escrow and for that reason I wouldn't trust you as one and would advise using someone else and I think his feedback is a valuable warning to others in this case so they can take it into consideration.

....
If it's justifiable and there is genuine concern, but if it isn't the feedback will very likely get brought up here and the reasoning questioned much like this thread now. If people abuse the feedback system over personal issues it usually comes back to bite them.

In this case his negative feedback is not right , as moreia told (he was involved in "first  row").

How so? Just because he wasn't involved and moreia has forgiven you doesn't invalidate your mistake or the concerns that arose from it.

...
Yes I believe my feedback is right. You have asked me many times, and I was threatened with negative feedback to remove it. Trust me if there was a doubt that it was right I would have removed it a long time ago and admitted my mistake.

My trust rating for you is not going to stop anyone from trading with you. At the very most it would cause someone to want to use escrow while trading with you, however even the most reputable people are willing to accept escrow

edit: I personally think the people who have left neutral feedback is incorrect

I think the negative feedback was right if I went away from the run or "bad"  I've lost  forever the moreia's account , but this is not the case. I'm still here , and the account was recovered.

But we never got the chance to see what happened if the situation wasn't resolved by BadBear. You yourself admitted you don't know what you would have done so you could've 'run' had it not been resolved. What if you lose a 10btc deal next time? You may run then rather than have to pay it back out of your own pocket. Should the feedback be removed until this happens again to see how you will react? I don't think it should.

[redsn0w]

Thanks guys for yours opinion , in this forum I've learned if you make a mistake you will receive a ~negative feedback ( also if the "mistake" has been "recovered). It is strange , but it is how it works here. If the account has not been recovered I will sure would paid him , because I didn't want to ruin my reputation for 0.80 bitcoin.  However , sorry for the "trouble" that I've generated here, and thanks again.