Topic: CanadianGuy - self admitted scammer - page 2. (Read 2953 times)

No, he's just a scammer. He bets with other members of these forums and if he wins he takes the money, if he loses he defaults.

the guy who was forced refunded lost 1000's of dollars from the bitcoin price appreciation, so yes he lost more

+

BFL is a company

Canadianguy is not a casino, betting exchange, or a legal contractor of bets

I think the main difference is that BFL, as a company, can choose to do business or not do business with whomever they want.  It doesn't bode well on their reputation that they did it, but they didn't scam anyone in my opinion - they gave the guy a full refund.  It is certainly a gray area though.

BFL forced a refund because the buyer complained. The buyer did not request it. The buyer was refunded the nominal amount he paid even though they had the buyer wait for months, well past when they were supposed to deliver.

Let's recap the two situations.

BFL:
- Owes either a mining machine or a refund.
- Is happy to provide a refund to anyone who doesn't want to wait for a mining machine.

CanadianGuy:
- Owes johnblaze 1 BTC.
- Refuses to pay johnblaze anything.

bitcointalk ethics:

its ok to steal from one person as long as its a small amount. its only a valid complaint if you steal millions

i'm sorry if i hurt CanadianGuy's feelings by speaking the truth. but that's no excuse for non-payment.

your all getting a hard on becouse canadianguy did't payout to  an arrogant noob who offended him? give me a break. what is a SCAM is BFL JOSH or known on bitcoin talk forum IBANA, who has millions of dollars in pre orders which hasnt been delivered after a year on non existent product  ssuch as the mini rigs. much more important scam accusations than this

I completely agree.  If you make a financial promise and fail to hold up that promise, and fail to make retribution for not holding up that promise, then you deserve the scammer tag.

This problem exists whether there is a reputation rating or not.  People can sockpuppet threads and call a perfectly innocent person a liar and a thief just as easily as they can leave negative feedback ratings that point to such sockpuppet posts.  It's not something that can be easily dealt with by any service providing reputations for their members.  eBay, heatware, etc all have the same potential problem.

I think you should pay johnblaze. apparently he is 12 y.o. and lacks patience but you lost the bet.

   No, it's not, and I doubt you would tell your dad you scammed someone.

You're a liar, boy.  I'm not going to believe another word you say.

Your dad should be beating your ass off for gambling with what probably is his money on the interwebz.

If he is really talking to a layer, he's a full retard - you can tell him to fuck off on my behalf.

Sorry guys, I couldn't help it, this kind of utter stupidity is really beyond me.

@firefop

apparently you have not actually read the thread, so i will clarify your fine points


yes.


no.


no.

i asked for confirmation of my bet in the very first post that i made, when i initially offered to take his bet. as soon as he confirmed in his next post then the bet is on. i too believe it is best to be as verbose as possible and this is exactly what i did. if you notice, i was the first bettor to actually request confirmation, because i'm well aware of the ambiguities that can arise in these situations. this is not the first time i've made internet forum bets in this fashion.

here is the order of things that happened before i started "insulting" him (if you want to call it that)

1. he refused to pay out the bet to me and the other guy
2. FOUR people corrected him
3. he claimed all four people were wrong, and refused AGAIN to pay
4. i then called him a scammer

i guess this is an "insult" in your book


hey at least you and CanadianGuy share the same ethics. maybe you should get a "potential scammer" tag

Did he scam you? Were you affected by his intended scam? Did you ever even have a transaction with him that went bad? (No I'm not defending his sleezy actions, I'm just questioning allowing non-connected parties to give feedback to others).

This is what I'm not liking about the transaction independent ratings on this forum now. It's too easy to astroturf opinions. You could (as you do for all your advertisements) just pay 20 people to post a negative feedback on someone else and make it appear that they are in fact bad. This forum pretends to manage reputations by giving scammer tags to those who cheat and steal, but it fails to manage against the most fragile part of a reputation-- susceptibility to libel and slander.

I'm not talking about CanadianGuy here whom I know nothing about, but in this cultist community it's very easy for 10 people who are in cahoots to cast doubt on otherwise respectable people to the point that people will hesitate to do business with them. The forum needs to either start managing reputations fiercely, or stop doing it at all. Reputation should not be based on the opinions of those that have nothing to do with them.

Random sockpuppet: I don't like TradeFortress, so I'm going to create 10 accounts and call him a scammer on all of them.
Newbie: That tradefortress has too many scammer accusations, I'm afraid to do business with them.
Moderator: Free market herp derp

thank you sir

I left scammer feedback for him.

This. Everytime I call these creeps out personally I get a general consensus of the sockpuppet army that it's "not scamming". Bullshit.

Scammer tag for those not honoring bets would be good for the forums. Let's not forget that a bet involves money, and if "CanadianGuy" would have won, he would have gladly taken the money. If he loses, he doesn't pay - win/win for him, and definitely a scam.

I would even go further and apply a scammer tag to the jokers that a) create auctions and then do not honor the winner because the final price is not high enough, without having established a minimum price; b) do not honour their bids in auctions; c) pump the price in public auctions with "bids received by PM" that nobody can verify.

I know that all the above is not technically a scam (well, probably C is), but some control to the auctions subforums would do good to everybody. Otherwise, half of the auctions are just an ugly way to lose time.

So, when is he getting the scammer tag?

I wish not to be THE one to add it (first) but this is really interesting, and this "Canadian" is just not coming through to make everyone "happy"

johnblaze (probably unbeknownst to him) apparently decided to do business with a 13 year old and not hammer out the details. 
johnblaze appears to have said enough things to warrant at least the intelligence of someone of (akin to "legal age" or "age of consent) responsible age.  I don't know how true / relevant any of that is, though.

I also admit to a similar confusion, and so didn't make a bet.