Topic: Campaign managers acting as Escrow (Read 972 times)

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.

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! 

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.

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.

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.

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.

It's off-topic here.

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.

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.

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.

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.


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.

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.


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.

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?

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?



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

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.

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:


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.

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.

Yep, but still, nothing beats this: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitcoin-developer-lukedashjrs-wallet-was-hacked-5432665

First this is not a question of if the manager should be held accountable for this incident or not but a question of responsibility, ad a campaign manager that such funds are entrusted your care the responsibility of protecting that funds and using them for what is meant for and achieving it 100% satisfaction of the client is very important for any reputable manager.

But this is not the case here, and in this situation even though the manager accepts the responsibility there is little that he can do judging from his many statements because he does not have a possible means of paying back.

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.

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.


I also remember some earlier cases, like master-P then very respected as an escrow service on the forum, or even the case with Lauda, but I'm not sure how it ended. Disputed were some fork coins that she claimed while holding a serious amount in bitcoin as an escrow. I still only remember the accusation but not the epilogue.

This is a good sign of maturity on your part, and it is good to see that you understand that it is important to be transparent and accountable for your actions. And, I appreciate you being open to the skepticism and understanding the reasons behind it, given the information that has been shared. People on the forums don't know you and your story, so It is natural for them to have doubts, especially when it comes to issues related to money. I hope you can follow through on your plan and make things right, and good luck with your journey.

Before this loss, julerz12 was known as one of the most trusted managers, unfortunately the loss of $5,000 changed the trust in julerz12 a bit. He said his funds had been stolen, whatever the reason he had to pay all the lost funds for his negligence to restore trust in him.
He is the first party who should be responsible for returning the funds, before the Campaign started he had held the funds for several weeks. This is the risk of a Manager, he never realized this incident would happen to him. For that reason he uses a hot wallet to store campaign funds, that amount of funds should be stored in a safe place (hardware wallet).

This incident will be a lesson for anyone who keeps large funds in a hot wallet, julerz12 will always remember this incident as long as he is alive because this is a lesson that will never be forgotten for him.

Thanks, I appreciate your skepticism and I totally understand why. You don't know me, heck, many of the users of this forum don't. So, I wouldn't be surprised by people doubting me or my "story".
As I have previously stated on the other thread, I accept all consequences and judgment everyone is going to throw at me for what happened, whether it be positive or negative. Tags, flags, and whatnot.
For what it's worth, I've handled and distributed a similar amount of crypto before, some in BTC while mostly in stablecoins and various tokens. You can see the list here, [link].
With that being said, I will continue to strive and work hard to prove that I have nothing but good intentions and work my ass off to pay those debts I now owe the project teams. It will take a while but I promise to make it consistent.

Yo!Mix was immediately paused as soon as I found out that the wallet was drained. It did not even get a chance to run for at least 1 day. The problem is that their representative no longer responds to my messages. I think they're really pissed and rightfully so. I still constantly send them messages tho as I'm waiting for them to send their official BTC address so I can return the $320 in BTC that was paid upfront for my 4-week management fee.

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.