Topic: DireWolf14 : Trust exaggeration (Read 843 times)

I'm going to use this as an excuse to barge into any thread and post any bullshit. Thank you so much. Can you add this to the guild standards?

Not really, because if he had a legitimate argument he would have made it instead of making utterly retarded claims that could be applied to literally anyone he and the rest of the clowns choose to target. This is not an isolated incident of this.

Maybe you should find a few minutes to read the thread instead of repeating this nonsense. Context matters.

Very cutesy. So cutesy I almost forgot you literally just tried use trying to build a positive reputation as justification for tagging people, claiming it is proof they could have ulterior motives. Show me the man, I will find you the crime. That is the Direpup credo.

You'd be wrong.  I'm booty scratcher from the planet Terra. 



WTF is this, a prison yard?  Who has been "shanked?"  Demonstrable proof, please.



You shouldn't.  Your dirty diapers are not my responsibility, and I refuse to be held accountable for your tendency to soil your britches.

I don't know what went on here in this instance, and frankly I don't care. I haven't read the thread. I just want to point out how fucking asinine this statement is. I might suspect you are a body snatcher from the planet Xenon, that doesn't give me a right to preemptively shank you in the name of protecting your potential victims.

Just because you have suspicions doesn't make you right either. You think your suspicions are above reproach, and anyone trying to build a reputation potentially has ulterior motives. EVERYONE potentially has ulterior motives, even you. Your statement is retarded and demonstrates the lack of logic you carry yourself with, the gate keeping you participate in, and why I wouldn't trust you with a dirty diaper.

As you are learning, there are many around here who will abuse their position to attempt to scam people.  The difference between someone building their credit score in real life, or building their trust score here on the forum is Identification.  IRL, you will be held accountable for defaulting on a credit card.  Here it is difficult, if not impossible to hold someone accountable for defaulting on a loan.

Additionally, the trust system has been used by many to build a reputation, who then abuse the trust that reputation instills.  Anytime someone is obviously trying to build a trusted reputation, it suggest to others that their might be ulterior motives.  It might be cynical and paranoid, but that doesn't mean they're wrong.

Maybe it was completely wrong from my side to say useless. But I guess you got my point. And you are right, it is aggressive. I found it very funny last night I was trying to sell a bet365 account and someone comes to me and he says: "I am a higher rank than you" - my reply: "Ok, that's fair, give me your profile I will send you a PM to confirm your identity and we can move forward" . His reply was fantastic: "Hold on I will buy one right now"; obviously he didn't bought any or even replied after but after my selling post here I was amazed, I got 30-40 telegram contacts, everyone looking to buy but at the end of it; no new dealers only scam attempts.
Looking at this case back and writing about the trust ratings, it might be true, so many people going off road but these will be always coming and going. I saw here people giving bad feedbacks for child abuse which is fantastic or for saying that they voted Trump (even funnier). I don't find this normal but this is it. Anyway thanks a lot for your reply, well explained.

Cheers,
M.

I rarely did any trades here. I did some a long time ago (I think even as a newbie), on some I didn't even get any trust entries. But I've never considered my "profile is useless". I can read, I can write, I can PM users I like to have private conversation with. This account has been fully operational since I created it, and it hasn't changed the way it functions after I made any deals *.

I think this approach to the forum ("nothing but building trust is relevant") is cancer. It would be great if people started to take the whole trust system as a byproduct of the deals they make, not the other way around.
And if people were a bit more relaxed about that whole thing, there would be much less need for "aggressive" (for lack of a better word) reactions to such behavior like marlboroza's in this very thread. I don't always agree with the way he jumps in, either, but I can see where this is coming from, and if you take a look at the forum, certain posts etc. (as you mentioned yourself, Railai), this is nothing unexpected, imho.

The rules for the trust ratings (if they haven't changed since I last read them) explicitly state that it's okay to use the trust ratings to express general opinion about a user, and that the former "risked amount" field may very well be used to give your opinion "weight".

---

* besides the usual activity related restrictions, signature / image limitations etc. every new account has to deal with, ofc.

I googled direwolf bitcointalk for a escrow need and by mistake I got over this thread. I am very sorry I opening it again but I have a question and I would to know the answer.

What is the point of making a credit card if not increasing your credit score? As It works in real life, the same should work here aswell no? Of course, it is obvious that a point someone might default, by what start with the initial risk from the beggining. If someone's new, 0.0015btc is worth nothing, less than my malboro daily pack.

I just didn't understand all the hate arround the subject and I want to say that I read all the pages and there is only hate talk and contradictions on basic provable facts.. Why it has to be this way?!

And again, a new user such as me has to be farm his trust. If I don't do deals, if I don't try to give something to the community with good deals or ideas, your profile is useless. There is not so much information at all; only some topics and replies are mostly spams by people that wear signatures and the only reason they post is for a few cents.

I consider feedbacks should be given more easier and the power of only one feedback should be lowered. This is the only way the system can go effective. Each time a deal got through, 1 feedback. 10 deals= 10 feedbacks. This way a situation like this one won't matter as no one will care about someone that exchange 10 bucks a year ago

Also I saw a lot of opinion feedbacks that increased a lot of users level up to +10 in some cases which I find funny... as some users just vote for themselves as they both like each other but they didn't risk money of none of the parties involved.

So how's that normal or ok? Please help me understand

Any of that would be possible with your own BTC without any loans.

I repeat. Shame to farm trust.

Yes, this does not exclude that I have other purposes.

What if I told you they paid me for every deposit I receive? What if I told you that they pay me for every account I register? Or if I told you that those 0.0015 btc are invested, along with my other btc and others, in order to receive income and share it with everyone? Or I'm just feeding the network with other taxes that I pay ... or who knows I play them ... Believe me, there are many reasons that you have not considered, you have only chosen the most common and obvious, even if wrong;)
Ye, close it. No poit to keep talk there, right?



I repeat. Shame.

OK, I have read this and to be honest, I don't really need to comment anything before sending trust feedback. I can still read and make my own conclusions based on reading without commenting, thank you very much for your opinion.

You mean outside of the fact that you admitted three times you were only taking out the loan to build trust?

Marco was holding 0.0017 BTC of yours, which you were offering to send to another person as collateral for a 0.0015 BTC loan. If you actually needed 0.0015 BTC to spend, you could just have had marco instantly return the 0.0017 BTC to you instead. That way, you would have ended up with 0.0017 - 0.0015 = 0.0002 BTC more, AND not have to take a loan, AND not have to waste time looking for a lender, AND not have to pay extra transaction fees, AND not have to pay repayment fees.

We are now going over the same ground repeatedly. You have admitted you only wanted a loan to build trust, and you have agreed that marco was attempting to help you do that. There is nothing more to discuss.

Buddy, your one of this "trust farmar" that you hate so much...

Proof: http://prntscr.com/pg6u3a

You have only given negative feedback, WITHOUT ALSO INTERVENTING PERSONALLY IN THE THREAD. Without even giving your opinion, you have only followed the others. You expressed negative feedback and, consequently, people trust you even IF YOU DID NOTHING. I call this trust farming.

Shame. That's all.

@DadyD I don't trust trust farmers so I won't read single word you posted. I consider them lies.

@marcotheminer can you lock this thread as it is resolved, DW removed negative feedback.

My comments on Posts 1, 2, and 7 having nothing to do with the ethics or logistics of having an escrow (or a guarantor, as you put it). My comments are to highlight that when marco said "Neither am I helping them get a loan", he is lying. He had agreed to hold bitcoin for you and escrow for you, therefore assisting you in getting a loan.

In terms of Post 12 and 16, you don't seem to have accepted that taking a loan that you don't need for the sole purpose of building trust is a shady thing to do. Do you disagree with this?

I am glad we are in agreement. He supported you in the shady activity of taking out a loan you didn't need for the sole purpose of building trust.

Oh boy...Oh boy..Stop climbing on the mirrors...I'll use google translate cuse i'm tired, sorry for my bad english.

First of all, did any of you take care to look for evidence about me and Marco because we are two different people or did you just take his and his past reputation as a bad example?
I think no. It's easier to point the finger and blame without proof, right?

I want to be a bit sarcastic so, sorry if your feeling get hurt

• Go on my profil and click on "Show the last topics started by this person."
• You'll see my last ( 3 ) topics.
• Two of which are almost the same. One in Italian and one in English. As you can see, especially those who think they are awake, as guarantor I asked @alexrossi. He, for some reason, disappeared for a few days without giving explanations and I decided to abandon his service as a guarantor.
• As recommended by @alexrossi I did the second post, in the international section to attract more people. and, as marco, he also advised me to use altcoin as a guarantee but, obviously, he is not with negative feedback (for obvious reasons, I am sarcastic.) And please, don't call him too, has been out of the games for a while.
• Here is some proff ( In italian ofc ): http://prntscr.com/pg5z1g , http://prntscr.com/pg5zga .
  

Oki, all this is to prove that I'm not marco.
If you need more proof, don't hesitate to contact me, I also asked @babo and @hostfat to be my guarantor, who for various reasons refused. AND PLEASE, don't mention them and leave them out !!

And now let's move on to the most important part.
I will mention a post that I think has the best summary of the situation, to explain how things are, from my point of view.


I answered in red.

I could go on all night quoting each post in part, but tomorrow I wake up at 4:40 am and honestly I'm tired of seeing sheep following sheep without trying to see the real point of the situation.

I hope that the feedback given to him is recalculated, as he has only worked with the purpose of helping me in my small intent, right or wrong.

You are unleashing a case without thinking about the consequences. You're just trying to be on the righteous side, when you're just ruining his business without caring at all.

If you have anything to say about his actions, adopt them to me as it is I who asked for his services. But obviously, you hate him, not me, right?

The "I AM OUT" thing is your own straw man. I don't think anybody expected you to say those exact words, or say anything at all. The point is that at the time you continued to engage the trust-farming newbie in ways that could help him farm trust and you didn't express any concern about trust farming, but now you're trying to rewrite history.

Every time you get caught up in some questionable shit your only concern seems to be your own trust score and not the shady dealings that lead to it. You need to start realizing that you can't fix this without rethinking your involvement in ludicrous $12 "deals" like this.

I contacted him privately and told him I would not anymore - which is why he posted the dead end post. Please people.. Let's take a breath and step back for a minute shall we.


I'm trying to make it clear I didn't aid and abet possible trust abuse.. Suchmoon please don't accuse me of just trying to weasel out.

Sending the escrow funds to marlboroza does not mean continuing to help - it means sending it to the person that asked for it, so the loan is done between the 2 parties without me involved anymore I was tired of the constant questioning of DadyD.

Best option for COLLATERAL. Do you really think I meant "oh, listen best option to abuse trust and get some on your profile so you can loan huge amounts is to do a), b), c)"...

I apologise I should've stated immediately I AM OUT. I did not foresee that not saying that would lead to this.

---

You asked if you could receive it - I said yes. Not that I would escrow for you. Sending you the funds from DadyD once he approved would mean I had NOTHING left (obligation, commitment, anything) in the deal.

Yes .. DadyD is not me lol if you're still on that as a point you're lost mate.

==

About the "being told to return funds" part you mentionned please see post above this one..

Oh, only if "they" are newbies  
I was dropped as a child so you have to forgive me for being "slow".

Actually, I wouldn't have placed anything if that feedback has been left as it was because it perfectly suits your profile - "helping "newbie" " to farm trust. Don't you worry about me, you will see my moral side when I get that loan back, but just wait for it.

You are lying. I don't know in what twisted reality do you live but after I asked first time "do we have a deal" you said:


And after that you didn't back out, "you have been told" to send funds back:

But just keep that threads and negative coming, I am sure you will find supporters.

No one can see it because it didn't happen. You didn't "back out". You offered an LTC loan:


Then newbie asked you to return the funds:


You obliged:


I can't see anything about you backing out or any concern on your part regarding newbie's trust farming.

Posts quoted in chronological order.

DadyD admits it the first time:

DadyD admits it for the second and third time:

After he admits it three times, you give him additional instructions:

And then you continue to offer to escrow for him:

You had ample time to back out and yet continued to offer to help him secure this frivolous loan.

THIS IS WHY I BACKED OUT. How can no one see this? There was no resolve time here - it was straight to negative trust placement.

And you don't see any issue with someone taking a loan for the sole purpose of building trust?

And then after he admitted it three times, you continued to try to help him to take out a loan he didn't need.

Yes he said he wanted to establish TRUST. Correct suchmoon, I was an escrow for him before that came to light / was interpreted as it is (yes I agree with you don't worry..). I don't get the benefit of any doubt here? A huge "come on....". That's the problem. Not what he's asking for/tried to do/etc. That 3 people (I'm assuming you agree with Dire, Marl) took it on me that the borrower wanted trust.

He wants trust feedback, the loan is just means to an end, he said it like 3 times in that thread, and you're the only one who's still playing dumb about this whole situation. Give it up.

He needs to use ETH if he wants a loan, that's what I said. I do not involve myself in the thing of trust - anyway it would've been clear after that no one would add trust for the sake of adding trust to his account..

Game what system..? I'm literally trying to explain that I was not involved in anyway in with what DadyD wanted to do (or he posted saying he wanted to do)...

By the way keep in mind there is a BIG language barrier with DadyD, I've reread what he posted and by saying "get some trust" I think he meant to convey he was looking to establish himself as someone who does as agreed upon (of course the risk is always there, anyone can be a scammer, etc) in this case he had collateral. Anyway I am not justifying his actions, I replied (the "convert BTC to ETH" reply) to explain how it usually works with collateral.. Not how to fucking farm trust - anyone can figure that out without me publicly posting how to do it.. I don't give pointers on that stuff, full stop.

Regardless, seems DadyD really didn't know about the vultures here and how mentioning trust and get close by would lead to this. Oh well - things happen as they should.

Newbie admitted he's farming trust. Then you explained to him that he needs to use ETH to work around the concerns of other users in the thread. Again, you're just looking for loopholes, excuses, anything to game the system.

I was the escrow./

On the accusation of trust farming aiding and abetting: I didn't know that was his intention..? I got caught up in a $20 loan - once he mentionned he was looking for trust that's where I knew people would come after me ... - afterwards I told him I would not continue to help out. Is that not clear enough that I would not help someone farm trust?

You're muddying the waters with this escrow thing. Your trust rating is for helping a newbie to farm trust. Now you're arguing technicalities, and yes, lashing out at marlboroza. That's not how you earn trust.

Ok suchmoon, thanks for the reply but that's not the case - please don't turn this into a me vs them situation again.. I think it's an expected kind of "lash out" (again strange choice of words but OK), just because the original member changes to neutral - a new one steps in for a negative? He would have not placed anything had Direwolf left the original negative.. That's also a part of my point..

Repeatedly? I literally took escrow funds worth MORE than the loan he was looking for. Truly was supposed to be a simple thing, I am escrow not the lender/borrower.

Looks like you're still thinking that you're right and everyone else is wrong. You can't fix your reputation by repeatedly getting yourself into shady shit and lashing out at people who point this out to you.

Thank you Direwolf, that's better than nothing at least.

Ah but of course! We must have one of the forum's self-appointed officers stepping in - neutral CANNOT happen people! "We all know what happened here" marlboroza - were you dropped as a child..? I'll remove that, a bit uncalled for. Anyway: the blind leading the blind and both taking pride in being led/leading as such! Big thanks mate, very useful .. You made your "I don't trust you" position clear when you copied someone else's trust earlier this year.

Oh and helping him get a loan? Yeah that's called helping out clarifying what others might have missed - try it for once - especially with newbies who are usually lost around here .. this forum would be much much more enjoyable, maybe we'd even grow as a community.


Pls.. Enlighten us, I was asked to hold it for him - I wasn't going to loan again, do you get the concept of 'once and then onto better things'? BTC was used for other purposes. Imagine the spongebob meme here > OPPORTUNITY COST.

[img ]https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/006/428/637738.jpg[/img]

We all know what happened here so I won't pretend and I will copy/paste your neutral and turn it into negative.

As far as I am concerned, I don't trust marcotheminer, I don't trust any newbie account who makes deal with him and I don't trust any newbie account who uses him as an escrow.

Person holding someone's 0.002BTC and at the same time not providing them 0.0015BTC with repayment of 0.0018BTC after they previously provided them 0.0015BTC no-collateral loan speaks for itself.

That is not true either, with all things said in this thread, you indeed tried to help "them" to get loan https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.52659481

I've changed it to neutral, that's as far as I'm willing to go. 

On it's own your post may sound like it's about collateral, but the context in which you posted it's obviously meant to coach the newbie on how to get a loan without leading to the suspicions that I raised earlier:


The newbie's answer; to farm trusted reviews.  It's all there in black and white and just in case it all goes away, here's the archive: https://archive.fo/L5p39

@Direwolf14 will you be leaving the negative trust?

Yes there are several occasions when I lent to newbies, Photobook was the most recent (another account people thought was my alt after the loan was successful lol). I lent this time because he provided the collateral, even without I would've done it because it was roughly $12 - I was OK with no-collateral risk for that.

Nowadays I am too much busy on my offline task. I told you your behaviour seems to me that you are the alter of that so-called newbie account. When I started my lending busienss there were few people who gave loan even tips to a newbie account and got trust after few days they tried to begging loan without collateral and they were also a newbie so they got negative trust and finally left the forum or using alter account. And I think you are doing the same. You were a professional lender so you know who you can give the fund and whom you not. Can you show a sample where you fund to a newbie while you were a professional lender? Hopefully, think you can't because you know very well.

Before few months a negatively trusted user took only 1$ to transfer his altcoin which value was more than 1000$ but the borrower didn't return that 1$ only. And a newbie who has not created any helpful post for the forum asked non-collateral loan and you gave, is it trustworthy? If you did so, why you are bothering other threads while the so-called newbie asking loan either on his/her new topic or others topic. I cant understand.
@marcotheminer sorry I have not replied your pm as I am not going to prove who is that so-called newbie and who are you.

Yes I agreed to HOLD his BTC (enough to cover 0.0015+10%).

What he states after, he stated - yes I must now reconsider what I am doing and will likely have to return his escrowed amount.

I advise the collateral part - some people don't understand the concept. Really nothing shady going on, an ignition for drama yes..

That's exactly what you are doing.

The thread is archived here: https://archive.is/p9Lmu

Post 1 - DadyD asks for a loan, and already includes you as the escrow, meaning you have already agreed to help him get a loan.
Post 2 - You confirm your willingness to help him get a loan.
Post 7 - You confirm you are holding BTC collateral from DadyD, whilst DadyD is asking for a BTC loan.
Post 12 - DadyD states "I'm trying to get some loan to incrase my trust"
Post 14 - DadyD states a second time "I do this think to get trust" (Presumably "think" means "thing") and a third time "I have 0 trust and merit, i just want to build some"
Post 16 - After stating three times he is only taking this loan out to farm trust, you then advise him to sell some BTC to buy ETH and use the ETH as collateral to obtain a BTC loan. That sounds an awful lot like instructions to me.

You are both helping him to get a loan by offering to escrow on his behalf, and you are also telling him how to farm trust (which he admitted he is trying to do) by trading the coin he wants for one he doesn't want just to use it as collateral to get a loan in the coin he just sold.

The whole situation is extremely shady.

Ok DadyD was tagged, I'm not telling him to trust farm, let alone how to do it..

Neither am I helping them get a loan, I'm explaining what's going on to someone whose English isn't top notch that's all. I have their funds backing up to 0.0015+10% BTC, as I've said. That amount I can cover from what the borrower has sent me.

You do not understand.
It is negatively perceived to help someone get a loan, whilst that person openly admitted to :



This is what it is all about. This is totally normal.
Trust isn't something you can "increase" with a whim. It is something you naturally earn from trades.

Coaching? I am holding his BTC - I gave him 1 micro loan myself.

EDIT: See my edit to the referenced post.. I was explaining to DadyD that collateral is better in another currency, so he can buy ETH instead and use it to secure 0.0015 BTC.. Don't go overtop Direwolf, I think you misinterpreted me in that reply.

You've abused that privilege in the past.

---

Wrong.  The review, as others have already pointed out is because you are coaching the (supposed) newbie on how to farm trust.  I may have chosen the wrong reply to use as the reference, but the proof is there, and the review is clear.

---

Thanks for asking politely, but to steal a line from Captain Barbossa: I'm disinclined to acquiesce to your request.

I am not backing it. I am holding his BTC that he sent to me.


I cannot loan him now, before he asked for LTC. I can probably next week if he still needs I would fill it.

Nice catch. Thanks for highlighting that to me.
I missed that line and and thought he just wanted to borrow some BTC.

Yep, in that context, such advice is questionable.
I understand DireWolf14's feedback now.

DadyD doesn't just want a loan. He wants a loan from a trusted user so he can get a trust feedback.

If marcotheminer just gives him a loan, the Newbie can't farm his trust. He's not using the 0.0015 for anything. He will just hold it and give it back to the lender in 48h with an extra. And marco probably already knowed this.

I'm guessing DireWolfM14 didn't mean just that particular post but rather the whole thread where marco is indeed helping the newbie to farm trust.

If you are willing to lose this money to the lender if DadyD defaults, why won't you send the 0.0015BTC directly to DadyD and expect him to repay you ?
DadyD is a newbie who registered here 2 weeks ago.

I am missing how the fact that backing DadyD's loan is going to give more credibility to it.
You have some history of not repaying loans on time. The whole situation is a bit odd.

However, the post referenced by DireWolf14 in his feedback seems to me like you tried to explain collateral to DadyD.
It does not seems to me like you were enticing a newbie into farming trust.

I can't message you, need to open a thread here.

You posted negative trust on my account for holding a new member's BTC. Not justified at all.

Please remove this, also I think it was a misunderstanding of what @DadyD searched for here (or maybe not), I was just holding more than his asked-for loan amount.