Topic: Leaving negative feedback on accounts that have been bought (Read 1074 times)

I've been doing exactly that for a while now, as I don't trust buyers and sellers.   I've gotten tons of retaliatory feedback too, and I'm proud of this.  They can go gargle a sausage.

Edit:  I did read the OP, skimmed thru replies, guess I got waylayed.  However,  I certainly do have a problem with what xetsr describes and that stuff is very much related to the account market that's leaving it's shitstain all over this forum.  My apologies,  Ecuamobi.

I would say the price paid for an account could be used as a warranty when making deals. For a brand new account the cost to create it was $0 so he can't be trusted with anything (escrow should always be used) and if he asked any loan without collateral he should receive negative trust.
With bought accounts that threshold would be the price paid for the account. Because we can't know the price for sure then a low estimation should be made.

That should be the only difference when treating a bought account vs. a brand new.

---

Did you read the thread and the updated OP before posting or just the title? It would seem the later.

When you take out a no-collateral loan your intentions might be to never repay your loan (I don't think this is the case). When I ask for collateral for a loan, I might be planning on running away with the borrowers collateral (this will never be the case for me). If someone is trying to buy BTC then they might plan on scamming if they receive BTC first and escrow is not used, but you won't leave negative trust because someone is not demanding to use escrow. You won't expect negative trust to be left in the other situations either, even though it is possible that a deal ends in being a scam, and you don't know their intentions

Why should bought accounts get special treatment? It's annoying and unfair to members who don't want to buy someone else's account or don't have the BTC to do so.

Right, you don't know their intentions, however there are non-scammer benefits to buying an account and I don't think it is good to leave trust based on "might" or "maybe".

Okay this is very different.

I would say for any of these, if the person is honest about them using a purchased account then they are doing nothing wrong (assuming they don't end up scamming).

2. Yes this is scammy behavior, however I think it should be clear they are making an active attempt to get out of using escrow and not a situation of "you send first or we use escrow".

3- it really depends, if the account was sold three months ago and has been active since then and is trying to take a loan of 25% of the account's value, then this probably isn't a scam (but it might be). On the other hand if an account was sold last month and has shown zero activity since the sale, then any loan will most likely end poorly for the lender. Also many sold accounts asking for loans are actually hacked (not sold), making them clearly deserving negative trust.

1- IMO, all of the very few people that it might be a good idea to accept PayPal (et al) from are probably never going to sell their account, so this makes it a little more complicated for me. However I would probably generally agree with negative trust left for someone trying to sell PayPal USD with a clearly purchased account.

How can anyone prove that a newbie is trying to scam by PayPal? Though it's unlikely, you won't know 100% until it happens. As for confirming a bought account, it's usually pretty obvious. The smart ones will get away but the idiots will be idiots and you'll notice the huge difference in post quality / style eventually.

Next thread should be in reputation: Should xetsr be removed from DT for leaving negative trust on those he considers untrustworthy  

If it can be confirmed that it was a bought account and they are using it to do a paypal scam then for sure give them some neg trust, Its trying to prove that though and not neg trusting someone who just doesnt know any better. We could stop accepting accounts as collateral but as im sure your aware, accounts are the main form of collateral on btctalk and they in themselves give btctalk its own micro economy.

I've never taken loans to get higher amounts later, it's actually the opposite with my loan amounts being the same or less  

Bought accounts make the exit scam much easier, so I'm not sure I get your point.


Lenders would stop taking such accounts as colleteral.

I don't think ya'll are getting the point I'm actually trying to make.

Examples:
If you neg a newbie or lower rank member trying to buy BTC with PayPal, you should neg a bought account doing the same thing.
Newbie or low ranked member tries to get a 0.01 loan. Denied, negative trust is added. Bought account (let's say, bought for 0.1 BTC) tries to get loan over 0.1, they should be negged. No?

I think each account should be based on its own merits. If your going to start negative trusting all accounts that are bought and sold then you might as well start giving lender negative trust as well because whenever someone defaults on a loan its then left with the lender who has no choice but to sell that account. Its swings and roundabouts.

you are right Buying trust is BUYING TRUST , may be you are even more right when you say your Bolded Part. I even see you Taking much loan  , anyways you cant blame someone like this until you got solid proof against them.
you might think why i took your example  even though the thread completely deals with bought accounts: , so i took it because recently i have seen many reputed guys who did not sold their account but themselves made successfully exit scam( booleans , master-p).
people like Quickseller are best example when it comes for trust , they made trust not from scratch but from dirt , and you see them where they stand proudly.

It depends, I want to buy accounts so I can have control of more accounts for their signatures. But some people want accounts to scam and scam again. That has happened so many times on this forum. Negative trust at least puts someone to not trust blindly.

You don't know what their true intentions are. They could be receiving a loan to make it easier to get higher loans with good intentions. Bolded part: Exactly! Making it much more easier to scam for higher amounts  

Buying trust is BUYING TRUST. You can spin it anyway you want but at the end of the day, you're still BUYING trust. Doesn't matter if it's trust as in positive feedback or trust as in the Hero+ status that more members than not actually consider trustworthy.

With a loan it is more clear cut then buying an account. If there is no purpose for a loan other then trust points then they are solely paying interest for trust. With a purchased account, the buyer is receiving more then just the trust points.

Also if someone buys an account and starts trading, claiming they are trusted, and that they have been around for a long time, maybe they send first anyway, or maybe they still use escrow, but maybe more people will be willing to trade and maybe they can get a better price because they don't think they are dealing with a time waster.

Most people here actually like to ignore the fact that scams happen in private so use the excuse "oh, account is worth more they wouldn't scam" and etc. So you can buy a hero or legendary for 1 BTC, easily scam for ROI and repeat.

LOL when it comes to these bought accounts buying BTC with PayPal and other revesible methods. They have months to scam! But no, bought accounts wouldn't do that. Apparently sig campaigns pay very well these days 

Giving an account a negative trust (especially from someone in default trust) will make that account completely unusable. Not just in sig camps, i mean completely. I don't even pay attention to the users and what they write who got neg feed from DT.

It looks like a harsh move to give someone a neg feed, but it is the only way to stop account sales. Everyone here knows people are buying accounts mostly for scamming others or making fake acc's for sig camps.

If you got banned or want to start a business in this forum, just start a newb account and start posting like eveyone else. If you are a honest person, you will gain trust in no time.

I've updated the OP to be more clear.

Bought accounts trying to buy BTC with reverible payment methods
Bought accounts trying to wiggle out of escrow and asking others to send first
Bought accounts trying to get loans
etc

You guys can see where I'm going with this?

I don't think "accounts that have been bought and are trying to buy, sell and exchange in the marketplace" is reason enough to leave negative trust. However it is a first flag.

For example if someone buys an account and instantly tries to get a loan giving that account as collateral then I'd consider leaving negative trust (unless the loan is a lot lower than the price of the account). Making deals just for earning trust is another flag. And asking others to trust them and refusing escrow just because of their rank and reputation (even if the account is not bought) is another red flag.

And if a user has 2 or more of these red flags then I'd definitely consider leaving negative trust. But as I said I don't think just the first one is reason enough.

Considering your statement,you might wanna refine your query.Neg accounts which are bought and who claim to be trusted because of their rank.

Also,do check mexx's known alt's of user's generated thread,you will have a lot of negging to do .

Touche.

The lending section is replete with people pledging their accounts as collateral.
That is no different from having an option to sell your account.

You loan people. Would you leave negative feedback for someone requesting loans to buy enough trust to make it easier to get higher loans?