Topic: marlboroza : trust abuser - page 3. (Read 870 times)

Even more odd; I think he was "assuring" that the newbie would pay back.



I think mdayonliner exhausted that excuse.

I'll address that, he's from country I just moved from so I guess there was a rapport made quicker than usual.

First loan: I just felt OK with risking $12ish for $2.5ish in 48 hours, worth it to me. (Remember I used to loan back in the pre-big-bubble-post-other-bubbles period 2014-2016, so it was just a sense of worthwhile RR ratio). Alexrossi confirmation or not I was willing to send. We spoke in private about the loan.

I was visiting Shasan's thread, I saw he posted there is all and was surprised that Shasan would reject (he's been known to reject easy interest pay days so I chimed in.. it would've been to his own benefit I wasn't poaching).

Defensiveness: sarcasm.. == "/s", it was just as odd you reply to my post than it was for me to reply in Shasan's thread tbh. I gave you my answer underneath. Assuring it means funds being held by me, not me "backing it with my name and own capital", I wasn't insuring it.

I was showing DadyD how to get his loan yes, with collateral. I didn't do so to allow him to gain trusts (that's what all this is about - my negative+neutral + all this typing needed to explain myself lol...). If that's a debate then it's just non-belief in what I say, simple as that.

I'm trying to get a few minds to comprehend I had no malicious intent (this is why I got the negative n'est ce pas?). Thanks for the attitude DireWolfM14 you just confirmed this is much more about emotional games than it is about actually maintaining a proper working forum, hope you get nice highs from these situations or it satisfies your daily desires idk. And it's a forum name, typo nothing more nothing less lol..


===


I don't think I was - he would never have gone for it, but pretty sure I already had the funds on me so it could've been an option now that you mention it.

Ah again .. misunderstanding after misunderstanding I did not offer escrow, I had DadyD's tip in YoloDice which he had sent to me - he asked me to keep it "as his escrow" and I agreed to that not knowing what I was in for. It tugged a few strings though that's for sure, I was just helping someone out who needed the 0.002 or wtvr tip on YoloDice to remain there.

Deep neg? I'm halfhalf I'd say. Trusted by some, disliked by others.


I thought you meant the one in meta? I locked it, so you can repost here or edit the one above if that works or was the plan.

Didn't I say I will update post, didn't I, didn't I?

People here have real life you know. Anyway, if you find something confusing (grammar, structure) we shall go trough it step by step, sorry for bad English.

---

Read my post, read my post, READ MY POST!

Was marco angling for shasan to use him (marco) as the escrow in that deal? Obviously marco will claim he was not LOL.

Come to think of it, this whole escrow thing is extremely shady. A deep-neg-trusted user should not be offering escrow services, even assuming the newbie is not his alt.

You seem to have taken a keen interest in DadyD's loans and his ability to get one, to the point where you are willing to take risks despite many red flags.  It really is quite odd, so I'm going to post all of the events that strike me as odd right here in this one post.

In this topic the newbie makes an unconventional loan request, claiming a trusted member (alexrossi) is guaranteeing the loan will be repaid, or is providing escrow.  It's worth noting that alexrossi never publicly confirmed this assertion.

None the less you posted this:


Still nothing from alexrossi, and no mention if alexrossi has confirmed his guarantee, yet three hours later you post this:  


Also, it's worth noting that the address to which you requested repayment hasn't seen any activity since September 23rd.  I know, I know; Yolodice...  But no public mention of any other arrangements being made.  Odd.

12hYBWiPqfwdveGzpbRdGxeqnoMcNvGNSq

Archive of the topic referenced above: https://archive.fo/Yg0l8

19 hours after paying you back the newbie asks Shasan for loan, which he rejects.  You seem to be quite concerned that Shasan has rejected the loan, and proceed to protest on the newbie's behalf.  Odd.


When I asked why so much concern, you seem to get defensive.  Odd.


Shasan mentioned his suspicion, and you got more defensive and offered to guarantee the loan for this random newbie.  Odd.

Archive of the posts in Shasan's lending thread: https://archive.fo/5gUmD

Your continuing to divert attention, and pretend that none of this happened, and deny you were coaching the newbie on how to get a loan without bringing attention to the fact he was just trying to farm trust is typical or everything I've come to expect from you: lies and deceit.

I'm telling you this once and only once:  If I remove my neutral rating it will be to add another negative.  

You just got your answer, so feel free to remove my misspelled name from your signature at your convenience.

My mistake.


Ah that's where I misspelt it.. Rapid fire because a lot to reply to, and off soon without much access until a few more hours.. DireWolfM14 my bad.

"This should be good" .. Pm's still blocked I think though. Anyway..

This should be good.

In the mean time you might want to spend a few minutes on trying to spell usernames correctly in your signature instead of this rapid-fire binge-posting you got going on. Kinda defeats the whole idea of asking for reconsideration if you're asking the wrong person.

Can you PM me a place we can chat like telegram or irc?

I know, I am little paranoid, head trauma from childhood...

I am not privately discussing trust things.

So, what I wanted to say is...well, it is my opinion, you can agree or not - don't care. No one should trust you with money -  I am not saying you are not repaying your debts , but your repayments are out of due, I don't trust such people, call it "many real life experiences". Then this shit with trust farming - I don't think I have to say a single word about it. Than that ponzi shit. Then this ranting around. Then this escrow things with newbie accounts and 40% loans to newbie accounts - you are fooling yourself if you think anyone is buying this story, trust me on this one. Try to change yourself dude, people will maybe remove negative eventually and change it to neutral - but not with attitude you have at the moment. I have changed many negatives to neutral (and removed some), but you don't see that because they won't say a word while people with negative will always make drama. Even cryptohunter never mentioned that I removed negative from her account(even thought many people after that placed -ve on her account(s)) but she will always find a way to shit on me.

Better ask yourself, if you lend me 500$ and and I say I will return it to you at February, and I don't return it, you chase me around and then I return you money on June, would you trust me next time? Lets be real here, you extremely likely wont. What kind of message have you sent with this:



...and you sent them positive trust a day after they confessed they are farming trust. What kind of message you have sent with this:


I gave you my reasoning:


I don't think I am no able to think for myself, read my words again. Get real and read my post.

Bill will reply to you asap.

@marlboroza can't PM you: I understood that you were saying DadyD was my alt, if I misunderstood sorry about that.

marco, is it possible that two people have a similar take on a single event?

I read through the thread referenced in your negative trust, and it does sound exactly like what they're claiming.

The newbie said they were asking for a loan to increase their trust value, after being questioned why they're using BTC as collateral to borrow less BTC. Then you suggested they purchase alt-coins to use as collateral so that it won't be questioned in the future. Let me know if I'm missing anything, because that's what quick research has lead me to believe.

Couldn't it be that marlboroza believes you deserve negative trust for this, and once it disappeared they felt obligated to add it? I fail to see how this is trust-abuse on any level; I'm still receiving new negative feedback for purchasing my account. Multiple people can rate you for the same thing. Now, I might think that it's excessive, late, redundant, bandwagon, but it's certainly not abuse and not something worth throwing a tantrum over.

Let it go mate haha, I redacted that for a reason because it wasn't necessary.. Sorry

At least he got your name right.

Someone who was dropped as a child.

Who copies and pastes someone else's negative feedback after they change it to a neutral. A bit odd to say the least and a bit abusive in reality.