Banned. FInally some peace.
Yea, you should be banned I agree.
Topic: Multi-Accounting Scammer Viceroy/buyer VIEW BONUS: Grue and Crumbs Bitchfight (Read 3700 times)
June 24, 2013, 07:03:58 PM
Yea, you should be banned I agree.
June 24, 2013, 07:02:37 PM
Oh, that makes alot more sense than me being TF or Inaba 
Banned. FInally some peace.
June 24, 2013, 06:40:16 PM
Oh, that makes alot more sense than me being TF or Inaba
June 24, 2013, 06:37:16 PM
Wait, you think I am TF or Inaba?
I am not Garr either. If you look at my signature you will see I have outted both TF and Inaba for being scammers.
* Viceroy scratches head
I am not Garr either. If you look at my signature you will see I have outted both TF and Inaba for being scammers.
I was talking about Oldsport you dolt. haha. i read the scam accusation against him, and though somewhat inconclusive(since he refused to address the op) it did seem that he was perhaps guilty of scamming fkgrew, who is probably also grue in this thread.
r3wt
June 24, 2013, 06:30:21 PM
Wait, you think I am TF or Inaba?
I am not Garr either. If you look at my signature you will see I have outted both TF and Inaba for being scammers.
* Viceroy scratches head
I am not Garr either. If you look at my signature you will see I have outted both TF and Inaba for being scammers.
June 24, 2013, 06:25:43 PM
Normally I wouldn't but since some people have actually started to believe his bs, this thread became very necessary.
MY BS? Oh that's RICH! Why don't you go answer any of the threads started by people who said you STOLE from them you piece of shit scammer? Huh?
Typical scammer. He attacks me because I LOVE to out scammers.
i can't tell, if this is TF's alt, Inaba's alt, or perhaps its Garr255 getting his frustrations out for being outed by Inaba. i'll hang up and listen.
June 24, 2013, 06:17:46 PM
Normally I wouldn't but since some people have actually started to believe his bs, this thread became very necessary.
MY BS? Oh that's RICH! Why don't you go answer any of the threads started by people who said you STOLE from them you piece of shit scammer? Huh?
Typical scammer. He attacks me because I LOVE to out scammers.
June 24, 2013, 06:16:53 PM
Props to Viceroy, I'm surprised he managed to keep all those posts to one account.
June 24, 2013, 06:16:17 PM
This is where he gets the accounts he uses to accuse me:
Him and BTCtalkaccounts ARE THE SAME.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226260.40
Him and BTCtalkaccounts ARE THE SAME.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226260.40
Really reaching now. I am not the same as BTCtalkaccounts.
June 24, 2013, 06:15:33 PM
So yeah, socking is fraud.
Said by Crumbcakes sockpuppet.
June 24, 2013, 06:15:12 PM
That is an immature and idiotic thing to do, I hope it gets stopped.
As do I. Annoying having multiple accounts is not against the rule so this idiot is able to run rampant
Says the guy who participated right alongside the now banned crumbcake who is using the new name crumbs in a spam fest that lasted 700+ posts and 24 hours until the OP's little lover (alt) Crumbcake was finally banned forever. (Then crumbcake just started a new account with the name crumbs).
June 24, 2013, 06:14:49 PM
I'm not here to debate with you. Unless you have something to contribute to the situation please refrain from posting. It's distracting people from the topic at hand.
ROFL. You tell em Grue, this pos scammer needs a tag a month ago!
June 24, 2013, 06:13:19 PM
[...]
Tell me, how did Viceroy/buyer intentionally deceive you for personal gain after gaining your confidence?
Tell me, how did Viceroy/buyer intentionally deceive you for personal gain after gaining your confidence?
He's trying to deceive others by slandering my name so I appear less credible when I expose him on his threads. I notice all his hostility started when I begin selling moneypaks thus threatening his idiotic startup.
I didn't slander anyone. My accusation that the OP is a scammer is well received in this forum. Just look at all the times he's been called a scammer:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scam-accusation-oldsport-201257
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/oldsport-another-scammer-193205
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scammed-again-193190
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scammer-tag-request-oldsport-202313
June 24, 2013, 06:11:55 PM
That is an immature and idiotic thing to do, I hope it gets stopped.
As do I. Annoying having multiple accounts is not against the rule so this idiot is able to run rampant
Says the guy who participated right alongside the now banned crumbcake who is using the new name crumbs in a spam fest that lasted 700+ posts and 24 hours until the OP's little lover (alt) Crumbcake was finally banned forever. (Then crumbcake just started a new account with the name crumbs).
June 24, 2013, 06:10:23 PM
That is an immature and idiotic thing to do, I hope it gets stopped.
I agree the OP needs to be stopped from spreading his lies and scamming the good people of this forum.
June 24, 2013, 06:09:43 PM
Tell me, how did Viceroy/buyer intentionally deceive you for personal gain after gaining your confidence?
I've never had any dealing with the OP other than to call out his scamming in my thread here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scammer-in-our-midst-oldsport-224769
June 24, 2013, 06:03:39 PM
I've never had any business dealing with the OP. He is just mad at me because I outed him as a scammer in THIS thread:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scammer-in-our-midst-oldsport-224769
If you read the thread I made you will quickly see that the OP is a known scammer. In the event you need more evidence you might want to read this epic scammer thread about the OP:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scammer-tag-request-oldsport-202313
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scammer-in-our-midst-oldsport-224769
If you read the thread I made you will quickly see that the OP is a known scammer. In the event you need more evidence you might want to read this epic scammer thread about the OP:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scammer-tag-request-oldsport-202313
June 23, 2013, 02:28:24 PM
Hmm, I actually think Buyer is Viceroy now.
its blatantly obvious if you read the other thread.
Are you talking about this thread? https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-post-that-started-it-all-239905
June 23, 2013, 11:58:33 AM
You're really so stupid? Really? You believe he invested the time to make hundreds of forum accounts in order to sell them? There is 0 demand for 0 post newbie accounts. Anyone can make them. So anyone that sits down and makes 100s of forum accounts is an idiot or he fishes them.
You're the idiot, read my threads, I BUY all my accounts from original owners, I do not create any accounts. Hacked/fished accounts are worth nothing because the original owner will reclaim them, usually within 24 hours.
I'll have to double check with the government here in North Korea to make sure there aren't any laws making it illegal to own multiple bitcointalk.org accounts. I'll get back to you when I get an answer.
June 23, 2013, 11:17:07 AM
It's because you are not intelligent. And there is no legal way you got hundreds of accounts to this forum. You probably run some type of virus or you're FOS.
The forum's administrator allows multiple accounts per person. So how is it not legal for him to get that many accounts? Is there some limit on accounts registered per hour?You're really so stupid? Really? You believe he invested the time to make hundreds of forum accounts in order to sell them? There is 0 demand for 0 post newbie accounts. Anyone can make them. So anyone that sits down and makes 100s of forum accounts is an idiot or he fishes them.
June 23, 2013, 02:00:50 AM
Hmm, I actually think Buyer is Viceroy now.
its blatantly obvious if you read the other thread.
June 23, 2013, 01:52:45 AM
Hmm, I actually think Buyer is Viceroy now.
June 23, 2013, 12:27:18 AM
It's because you are not intelligent. And there is no legal way you got hundreds of accounts to this forum. You probably run some type of virus or you're FOS.
The forum's administrator allows multiple accounts per person. So how is it not legal for him to get that many accounts? Is there some limit on accounts registered per hour?You're really so stupid? Really? You believe he invested the time to make hundreds of forum accounts in order to sell them? There is 0 demand for 0 post newbie accounts. Anyone can make them. So anyone that sits down and makes 100s of forum accounts is an idiot or he fishes them.
June 22, 2013, 08:12:59 PM
The forum's administrator allows multiple accounts per person. So how is it not legal for him to get that many accounts? Is there some limit on accounts registered per hour?
There is no point replying to this thread Oldsport is now posting under his next username.
June 22, 2013, 12:44:32 PM
It's because you are not intelligent. And there is no legal way you got hundreds of accounts to this forum. You probably run some type of virus or you're FOS.
The forum's administrator allows multiple accounts per person. So how is it not legal for him to get that many accounts? Is there some limit on accounts registered per hour? June 22, 2013, 01:53:31 AM
BTCTalkAccounts == buyer == viceroy == grue == crumbs right?
yeah listen to Oldsport, eveything he says makes perfect sense, he is 100% definitely not a scammer.
Here is an interesting thought, I have hundreds of accounts, why would I suddenly post on this thread with this account if I was Viceroy, doesn't make sense really, I could have used any account and it would have looked 1000 times less suspicious than an account that buys/sells accounts, I could have even just logged in as a mod and trashed the thread altogether although I don't know for sure if I have any accounts with mod permissions on this board as I'm too lazy to check.
The reason I posted with this account is because I was browsing the forum, answering PM's on this account and stumbled across the threa and decided to post something which I forget, and then Mr Scammer Oldsport shows up to "out" me
It's because you are not intelligent. And there is no legal way you got hundreds of accounts to this forum. You probably run some type of virus or you're FOS.
June 21, 2013, 10:31:26 PM
BTCTalkAccounts == buyer == viceroy == grue == crumbs right?
mind = blown!I should really ban myself.
June 21, 2013, 10:28:44 PM
BTCTalkAccounts == buyer == viceroy == grue == crumbs right?
yeah listen to Oldsport, eveything he says makes perfect sense, he is 100% definitely not a scammer.
Here is an interesting thought, I have hundreds of accounts, why would I suddenly post on this thread with this account if I was Viceroy, doesn't make sense really, I could have used any account and it would have looked 1000 times less suspicious than an account that buys/sells accounts.
The reason I posted with this account is because I was browsing the forum, answering PM's on this account and stumbled across the threa and decided to post something which I forget, and then Mr Scammer Oldsport shows up to "out" me
June 21, 2013, 10:17:39 PM
Just a heads up, you don't wanna trifle with BTCTalkAccounts. he is dangerous imo. google the word "doxxing". this is more or less what he does for a living. he steals peoples identities and extorts payment from them in bitcoin. he did it to me just this past week.
LOL!
I missed this part earlier. This isn't true there is nothing to worry about. I'm qualified to be a private investigator and I do dox people and do background checks before I do large trades (over $10,000). I also dox people who try to defraud me but I'm sure most people here do the same.
I have no interest in stealing identities, it's not what I do for a living, I already make enough money with what I do probably more than I could from ID fraud, but thats beside the point because it's immoral, wrong and illegal.
I have in the past caused my enemies damages, no ID fraud or anything serious. I would never do anything like that to a business partner, friend/acquaintance or stranger, however, only someone who continually tries to screw me.
Don't worry anyone (r3wt, oldsport) I'm not going to do shit because I'm too lazy and have other shit to do, besides, I do not consider you guys my "enemies" and neither of you have defrauded me, so your safe
But Oldsport is still dumb as fuck it's hilarious to say the least. 
June 21, 2013, 08:58:23 PM
BTCTalkAccounts == buyer == viceroy == grue == crumbs right?
June 21, 2013, 06:53:40 PM
You're not in kindergarten & you're not talking to a 2-yr-old. You claimed that the notion of Obama being called a scamer is absurd on its face. I presented you with 947,000 reasons to think otherwise. In .25 seconds. Next.
Yay appeal to tone!Quote
I repeat, learn to logic. This has nothing to do with reductio ad absurdum. How old are you?
Are you daffy?
so is ur mom (you see where this is going?)You are the one who stated logic=scam. You succeeded at pointing out the absurdity of your own logic.
Wait wat. Please quote the exact post where I said "logic = scam".edit:
nice, oldsport added "Grue and Crumbs Bitchfight" to the topic title. Because when forum admins aren't in your favor (regarding duplicate accounts), you call "buyer" a scammer. If anyone opposes you, commence name calling.
June 21, 2013, 06:52:59 PM
Which of your accounts should I pm? You, viceroy, buyer...? 
LOL!
Like I said, I'm only going to say it once. Now fuck you.
June 21, 2013, 06:50:41 PM
Him and BTCtalkaccounts ARE THE SAME.
I'm going to just say this once, so listen carefully:
You are the dumbest fucking person on this entire planet. I wouldn't go as far as to say the whole universe, but I can say for 100% fact that you are the dumbest living organism on Earth.
I don't doubt that you think I am viceroy, you're so dumb that you actually think that.
* BTCTalkAccounts warns everyone not to trade with Oldsport
See what I did there?
Your name is ruined, you can accuse everyone of everything but it won't make you any more reputable and nobody is going to ever trade with you again. Please PM me if you need a new account with better rep or contact me on BM, like I said before I have the best inventory by far.
Which of your accounts should I pm? You, viceroy, buyer...?
June 21, 2013, 06:45:31 PM
Him and BTCtalkaccounts ARE THE SAME.
I'm going to just say this once, so listen carefully:
You are the dumbest fucking person on this entire planet. I wouldn't go as far as to say the whole universe, but I can say for 100% fact that you are the dumbest living organism on Earth.
I don't doubt that you think I am viceroy, you're so dumb that you actually think that.
* BTCTalkAccounts warns everyone not to trade with Oldsport
See what I did there?
Your name is ruined, you can accuse everyone of everything but it won't make you any more reputable and nobody is going to ever trade with you again. Please PM me if you need a new account with better rep or contact me on BM, like I said before I have the best inventory by far.
Also, about the trust you left me, both of those things are allowed by ToS, it is encouraged to have a different forum account for business and pleasure so you can express your opinion without people thinking that your business supports that option. Selling accounts is allowed too provided the account isn't stolen.
June 21, 2013, 01:59:36 PM
This is getting ridiculous. This exact phrase, "Obama is a scammer," nets me: "About 947,000 results (0.25 seconds)" on Google. If we're down to being all technical & pedantic, then at least some people don't find the notion ridiculous. As far as Fox News? Who cares?
https://i.minus.com/iVw1xL2C11LnF.pngyour point? If you walked to up to someone and asked if Obama was a scammer, you would likely get a weird look. People may respond that he's a liar or a terrible president, but no one is going to call him a scammer.
You're not in kindergarten & you're not talking to a 2-yr-old. You claimed that the notion of Obama being called a scamer is absurd on its face. I presented you with 947,000 reasons to think otherwise. In .25 seconds. Next.
-"If your definition can lead to absurd implications, it's not correct, period." -- definitions don't "lead" to anything, derivations do. Learn to logic.
nope, it's validhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
I repeat, learn to logic. This has nothing to do with reductio ad absurdum. How old are you?
-"...if you check all the other threads in the "scam accusations", you'll see that most of the threads are about people actually losing money..." -- This is exactly why we're having this back & forth, the point i'm trying to *address* in my original post. If i didn't feel that [in this instance] multiple accounts are created to defraud people ["losing money," as you put it], we wouldn't be having this discussion.
um, ok?Are you daffy?
-"if I applied the logic of "slander" == "scam", then I can make a thread accusing Oldsport of being a "scammer"" --Irrelevant to the topic at hand. Start/don't any thread you want.
It's to show how ridiculous your logic is.You are the one who stated logic=scam. You succeeded at pointing out the absurdity of your own logic.
June 21, 2013, 01:33:36 PM
This is getting ridiculous. This exact phrase, "Obama is a scammer," nets me: "About 947,000 results (0.25 seconds)" on Google. If we're down to being all technical & pedantic, then at least some people don't find the notion ridiculous. As far as Fox News? Who cares?
https://i.minus.com/iVw1xL2C11LnF.pngyour point? If you walked to up to someone and asked if Obama was a scammer, you would likely get a weird look. People may respond that he's a liar or a terrible president, but no one is going to call him a scammer.
-"If your definition can lead to absurd implications, it's not correct, period." -- definitions don't "lead" to anything, derivations do. Learn to logic.
nope, it's validhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
-"...if you check all the other threads in the "scam accusations", you'll see that most of the threads are about people actually losing money..." -- This is exactly why we're having this back & forth, the point i'm trying to *address* in my original post. If i didn't feel that [in this instance] multiple accounts are created to defraud people ["losing money," as you put it], we wouldn't be having this discussion.
um, ok? -"if I applied the logic of "slander" == "scam", then I can make a thread accusing Oldsport of being a "scammer"" --Irrelevant to the topic at hand. Start/don't any thread you want.
It's to show how ridiculous your logic is. June 21, 2013, 11:57:19 AM
[...]
You seem to have missed my point: This is the subforum for non-technical grievances. Being the only one, it's also the most fitting. Human language is horribly imprecise, dicdefs are horribly vague, incomplete, obsolescent &, on top of that, inconsistent across publishers/versions/dates. English is not a formal language, dicdefs are descriptive, not definitive -- any logical deduction is guaranteed to end in disaster: Garbage in - garbage out. i hope we're on the same page.
Just to humor you, and 'coz i'm as neardsly, i'll address your first one:
Of course, when Obama lied, he scammed the american people. We good?
First, if you're going to bite the bullet and say obama's a scammer, you might want to know that not even republicans (or fox news) calls him a scammer. So your point falls apart right there. Second, what's wrong with using logic? If your definition can lead to absurd implications, it's not correct, period. Third, if you check all the other threads in the "scam accusations", you'll see that most of the threads are about people actually losing money/bitcoins/altcoins/merchandise. Forth, if I applied the logic of "slander" == "scam", then I can make a thread accusing Oldsport of being a "scammer" for slandering another member. Viceroy/buyer might be slandering people and using sockpuppet accounts, but that doesn't make it okay to call him something he's not.Just to humor you, and 'coz i'm as neardsly, i'll address your first one:
Of course, when Obama lied, he scammed the american people. We good?
This is getting ridiculous. This exact phrase, "Obama is a scammer," nets me: "About 947,000 results (0.25 seconds)" on Google. If we're down to being all technical & pedantic, then at least some people don't find the notion ridiculous. As far as Fox News? Who cares?
-"If your definition can lead to absurd implications, it's not correct, period." -- definitions don't "lead" to anything, derivations do. Learn to logic.
-"...if you check all the other threads in the "scam accusations", you'll see that most of the threads are about people actually losing money..." -- This is exactly why we're having this back & forth, the point i'm trying to *address* in my original post. If i didn't feel that [in this instance] multiple accounts are created to defraud people ["losing money," as you put it], we wouldn't be having this discussion.
-"if I applied the logic of "slander" == "scam", then I can make a thread accusing Oldsport of being a "scammer"" --Irrelevant to the topic at hand. Start/don't any thread you want.
Curio: I've just found out that not only is socking condoned, but shilling (bidding up one's own auctions) is also 100% legit as far as Theymos is concerned.
June 21, 2013, 10:36:39 AM
I'm politely asking you to stop posting in my thread. You lost the argument on the definitive level and now you're trying to debate that you're grasping for reasons to still be right. Please stop. If you have an issue with the word I used, tough luck but please stop whining about it.
What's wrong? dissenting opinion that you can't refute? Hint: this is a forum, a place for discussion. If you wanted a place where everyone will support you no questions asked, you came to the wrong place. Keep in mind I'm not arguing viceroy/buyer didn't slander or have multiple accounts. I'm simply arguing that "scammer" is the wrong word to use.edit:
I like how you won the argument by using well thought out counter arguments and refutations. /s
edit2:
I do have an issue with the word you're using. You're calling someone a scammer, when he didn't scam anyone. That's slander, period.
edit3:
stop editing that post, just make a new reply ffs.
He indicated that if I did not stop bothering Viceroy/Btctalkaccounts/buyer then there would be something negative impending ( my doxxing etc.).
He was simply warning you that Btctalkaccounts is a dangerous person. If you're going to call that a "threat", you might want to call your DA and get your local sheriff convicted for "threatening" the public.
June 21, 2013, 10:31:49 AM
Listen, this is not the place to try and put your yellowing law degree to use. Stop spamming the thread.
You are here:
You seem to have missed my point: This is the subforum for non-technical grievances. Being the only one, it's also the most fitting. Human language is horribly imprecise, dicdefs are horribly vague, incomplete, obsolescent &, on top of that, inconsistent across publishers/versions/dates. English is not a formal language, dicdefs are descriptive, not definitive -- any logical deduction is guaranteed to end in disaster: Garbage in - garbage out. i hope we're on the same page.
Just to humor you, and 'coz i'm as neardsly, i'll address your first one:
Of course, when Obama lied, he scammed the american people. We good?
First, if you're going to bite the bullet and say obama's a scammer, you might want to know that not even republicans (or fox news) calls him a scammer. So your point falls apart right there. Second, what's wrong with using logic? If your definition can lead to absurd implications, it's not correct, period. Third, if you check all the other threads in the "scam accusations", you'll see that most of the threads are about people actually losing money/bitcoins/altcoins/merchandise. Forth, if I applied the logic of "slander" == "scam", then I can make a thread accusing Oldsport of being a "scammer" for slandering another member. Viceroy/buyer might be slandering people and using sockpuppet accounts, but that doesn't make it okay to call him something he's not.Just to humor you, and 'coz i'm as neardsly, i'll address your first one:
Of course, when Obama lied, he scammed the american people. We good?
I'm politely asking you to stop posting in my thread. You lost the argument on the definitive level and now you're still trying to debate and grasp for reasons to still be right. Please stop. If you have an issue with the word I used, tough luck but please stop whining about it. Oh and I never said he was actively threatning me. Since you love linguistics it might please you to look up the word threat:
"an indication of something impending"
He indicated that if I did not stop bothering Viceroy/Btctalkaccounts/buyer then there would be something negative impending ( my doxxing etc.).
June 21, 2013, 10:28:52 AM
Listen, this is not the place to try and put your yellowing law degree to use. Stop spamming the thread.
You are here:You seem to have missed my point: This is the subforum for non-technical grievances. Being the only one, it's also the most fitting. Human language is horribly imprecise, dicdefs are horribly vague, incomplete, obsolescent &, on top of that, inconsistent across publishers/versions/dates. English is not a formal language, dicdefs are descriptive, not definitive -- any logical deduction is guaranteed to end in disaster: Garbage in - garbage out. i hope we're on the same page.
Just to humor you, and 'coz i'm as neardsly, i'll address your first one:
Of course, when Obama lied, he scammed the american people. We good?
First, if you're going to bite the bullet and say obama's a scammer, you might want to know that not even republicans (or fox news) calls him a scammer. So your point falls apart right there. Second, what's wrong with using logic? If your definition can lead to absurd implications, it's not correct, period. Third, if you check all the other threads in the "scam accusations", you'll see that most of the threads are about people actually losing money/bitcoins/altcoins/merchandise. Forth, if I applied the logic of "slander" == "scam", then I can make a thread accusing Oldsport of being a "scammer" for slandering another member. Viceroy/buyer might be slandering people and using sockpuppet accounts, but that doesn't make it okay to call him something he's not.Just to humor you, and 'coz i'm as neardsly, i'll address your first one:
Of course, when Obama lied, he scammed the american people. We good?
[...]
A threat sent via PM:
LOL 2GOLD4ME. He was warning you about a dangerous member and now you're saying he's threatening you? Might want to rename this board "Member Threats". A threat sent via PM:
Just a heads up, you don't wanna trifle with BTCTalkAccounts. he is dangerous imo. google the word "doxxing". this is more or less what he does for a living. he steals peoples identities and extorts payment from them in bitcoin. he did it to me just this past week.
June 21, 2013, 02:19:13 AM
i wasn't threatening you. i was giving you the heads up before you wind up in the boat i and several others are in. he seems to be able to obtain access to peoples private information somehow. just a heads up before you fuck up. i pm'd the mods what he did to me and so far all i hear is crickets.
June 21, 2013, 02:01:54 AM
if i was you i wouldn't worry about it.
Normally I wouldn't but since some people have actually started to believe his bs, this thread became very necessary.
UPDATE:
A threat sent via PM:
Just a heads up, you don't wanna trifle with BTCTalkAccounts. he is dangerous imo. google the word "doxxing". this is more or less what he does for a living. he steals peoples identities and extorts payment from them in bitcoin. he did it to me just this past week.
June 21, 2013, 01:44:51 AM
if i was you i wouldn't worry about it.
June 21, 2013, 01:30:46 AM
This is where he gets the accounts he uses to accuse me:
Him and BTCtalkaccounts ARE THE SAME.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226260.40
Him and BTCtalkaccounts ARE THE SAME.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226260.40
June 20, 2013, 04:18:07 PM
Wait, you honestly missed everything above "impostor"? Selective redacting much?
[...]
This help?
Let me tear part the rest of them as well.[...]
This help?
Edit: Not defending OldSport, just pointing out that the narrow interpretation of "scammer" isn't helping anyone. If people post in "Scam Accusations," they obviously feel their grievance fits the bill. 'Till there's a "Things mistakenly thought to be scams but technically aren't" forum, why not use this as a catch-all?
I'm not defending Viceroy/buyer's actions either. I find it wrong for OldSport to use sensationalist titles and words to slander is opponent, yet he's accusing him of the very same thing.You seem to have missed my point: This is the subforum for non-technical grievances. Being the only one, it's also the most fitting. Human language is horribly imprecise, dicdefs are horribly vague, incomplete, obsolescent &, on top of that, inconsistent across publishers/versions/dates. English is not a formal language, dicdefs are descriptive, not definitive -- any logical deduction is guaranteed to end in disaster: Garbage in - garbage out. i hope we're on the same page.
Just to humor you, and 'coz i'm as neardsly, i'll address your first one:
Of course, when Obama lied, he scammed the american people. We good?
June 20, 2013, 03:31:36 PM
Wait, you honestly missed everything above "impostor"? Selective redacting much?
[...]
This help?
Let me tear part the rest of them as well.[...]
This help?
Edit: Not defending OldSport, just pointing out that the narrow interpretation of "scammer" isn't helping anyone. If people post in "Scam Accusations," they obviously feel their grievance fits the bill. 'Till there's a "Things mistakenly thought to be scams but technically aren't" forum, why not use this as a catch-all?
I'm not defending Viceroy/buyer's actions either. I find it wrong for OldSport to use sensationalist titles and words to slander is opponent, yet he's accusing him of the very same thing.Listen, this is not the place to try and put your yellowing law degree to use. Stop spamming the thread.
June 20, 2013, 03:07:08 PM
Wait, you honestly missed everything above "impostor"? Selective redacting much?
[...]
This help?
Let me tear part the rest of them as well.[...]
This help?
Edit: Not defending OldSport, just pointing out that the narrow interpretation of "scammer" isn't helping anyone. If people post in "Scam Accusations," they obviously feel their grievance fits the bill. 'Till there's a "Things mistakenly thought to be scams but technically aren't" forum, why not use this as a catch-all?
I'm not defending Viceroy/buyer's actions either. I find it wrong for OldSport to use sensationalist titles and words to slander is opponent, yet he's accusing him of the very same thing. June 20, 2013, 02:53:03 PM
Where do people get these strict definitions of "scam"? Scam is a non-technical slang term, and is defined very loosely:
read the first few posts.[...]
b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.
So yeah, socking is fraud.
But how is using another account impersonating anyone? According to that logic, anyone on 4chan is an "imposter", because they're all "[assuming] a false pose".b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.
So yeah, socking is fraud.
Wait, you honestly missed everything above "impostor"? Selective redacting much?
Quote
fraud (frôd)
n.
1. A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.
2. A piece of trickery; a trick.
3.
a. One that defrauds; a cheat.
b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.
n.
1. A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.
2. A piece of trickery; a trick.
3.
a. One that defrauds; a cheat.
b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.
This help?
Edit: Not defending OldSport, just pointing out that the narrow interpretation of "scammer" isn't helping anyone. If people post in "Scam Accusations," they obviously feel their grievance fits the bill. 'Till there's a "Things mistakenly thought to be scams but technically aren't" forum, why not use this as a catch-all?
June 20, 2013, 02:33:13 PM
I'm not here to debate with you. Unless you have something to contribute to the situation please refrain from posting. It's distracting people from the topic at hand.
Oh boo fucking hoo. You're just mad that someone has a differing opinion. This is a forum, a place for debate. You're making false accusations against a forum member. In addition, you're using misleading words in an attempt to discredit him. And with all of this, you're expecting no challenge from other members? How about you start a self moderated topic so your little special space where you can't have your views challenged."It's distracting people from the topic at hand." What's wrong, are you upset that people are poking holes in your argument?
Where do people get these strict definitions of "scam"? Scam is a non-technical slang term, and is defined very loosely:
read the first few posts.[...]
b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.
So yeah, socking is fraud.
But how is using another account impersonating anyone? According to that logic, anyone on 4chan is an "imposter", because they're all "[assuming] a false pose". b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.
So yeah, socking is fraud.
June 19, 2013, 09:28:36 AM
You gave me your definition of scam: "A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence scheme and scam) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence." And I showed you how Viceroy& co. met the criteria. So how so is it very different? I'm also not slandering anyone. I'm defending myself by explaining to people what's truly going on.
A scammer is a person who has defrauded (intentionally deceive for personal gain) someone after gaining their confidence. [...]
Where do people get these strict definitions of "scam"? Scam is a non-technical slang term, and is defined very loosely:
So, unless this forum has its own strict technical definition, it goes something like this:
scam (skm) Slang
n.
A fraudulent business scheme; a swindle.
tr.v. scammed, scam·ming, scams
To defraud; swindle.
-->
swin·dle (swndl)
v. swin·dled, swin·dling, swin·dles
v.tr.
1. To cheat or defraud of money or property.
2. To obtain by fraudulent means: swindled money from the company.
v.intr.
To practice fraud as a means of obtaining money or property.
n.
The act or an instance of swindling.
-->
fraud (frôd)
n.
1. A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.
2. A piece of trickery; a trick.
3.
a. One that defrauds; a cheat.
b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.
So yeah, socking is fraud.
June 19, 2013, 09:02:13 AM
You gave me your definition of scam: "A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence scheme and scam) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence." And I showed you how Viceroy& co. met the criteria. So how so is it very different? I'm also not slandering anyone. I'm defending myself by explaining to people what's truly going on.
A scammer is a person who has defrauded (intentionally deceive for personal gain) someone after gaining their confidence. You argue that:
Quote from: Oldsport
He's trying to deceive others by slandering my name so I appear less credible when I expose him on his threads
A scam (by definition) requires an entity to be defrauded after their confidence was gained. You can argue that slandering you is "fraud", which is a stretch. But even that were true, it would not constitute a scam because he did not gain your confidence. The best you can do is call him an attempted scammer, but even that's a stretch unless you can show he is deceiving someone.In addition, if your logic were true, it would mean political attack ads are "scams", which is absurd.
I'm not here to debate with you. Unless you have something to contribute to the situation please refrain from posting. It's distracting people from the topic at hand.
June 18, 2013, 08:32:58 PM
You gave me your definition of scam: "A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence scheme and scam) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence." And I showed you how Viceroy& co. met the criteria. So how so is it very different? I'm also not slandering anyone. I'm defending myself by explaining to people what's truly going on.
A scammer is a person who has defrauded (intentionally deceive for personal gain) someone after gaining their confidence. You argue that:
Quote from: Oldsport
He's trying to deceive others by slandering my name so I appear less credible when I expose him on his threads
A scam (by definition) requires an entity to be defrauded after their confidence was gained. You can argue that slandering you is "fraud", which is a stretch. But even that were true, it would not constitute a scam because he did not gain your confidence. The best you can do is call him an attempted scammer, but even that's a stretch unless you can show he is deceiving someone.In addition, if your logic were true, it would mean political attack ads are "scams", which is absurd.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet
June 18, 2013, 05:04:04 PM
Oldsport, I have no opinion on the topic at hand, other than to say that what you're accusing that member of is typical of most members here. Did you really think all the members on this forum who post in "praise" of another member are separate individuals? Did you really think that everyone hates Ripple? Did you really think that anyone used that new Altcoin that came out yesterday? Welcome to the idiotic world of anonymity.
June 18, 2013, 05:01:32 PM
Then you're only accusing him of slander. That's very different from "scammer". It's ironic how you're accusing him of slandering, yet you're slandering him yourself.
Slander is also different than libel.
June 18, 2013, 04:13:17 PM
[...]
Tell me, how did Viceroy/buyer intentionally deceive you for personal gain after gaining your confidence?
Tell me, how did Viceroy/buyer intentionally deceive you for personal gain after gaining your confidence?
He's trying to deceive others by slandering my name so I appear less credible when I expose him on his threads. I notice all his hostility started when I begin selling moneypaks thus threatening his idiotic startup.
You gave me your definition of scam: "A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence scheme and scam) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence." And I showed you how Viceroy& co. met the criteria. So how so is it very different? I'm also not slandering anyone. I'm defending myself by explaining to people what's truly going on.
June 18, 2013, 03:55:45 PM
[...]
Tell me, how did Viceroy/buyer intentionally deceive you for personal gain after gaining your confidence?
Tell me, how did Viceroy/buyer intentionally deceive you for personal gain after gaining your confidence?
He's trying to deceive others by slandering my name so I appear less credible when I expose him on his threads. I notice all his hostility started when I begin selling moneypaks thus threatening his idiotic startup.
June 18, 2013, 08:34:20 AM
That is an immature and idiotic thing to do, I hope it gets stopped.
As do I. Annoying having multiple accounts is not against the rule so this idiot is able to run rampant
June 18, 2013, 04:55:26 AM
That is an immature and idiotic thing to do, I hope it gets stopped.
June 18, 2013, 04:10:32 AM
Quote from: Wikipedia
A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence scheme and scam) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence.
Quote from: Wikipedia
In criminal law, fraud is intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual
Tell me, how did Viceroy/buyer intentionally deceive you for personal gain after gaining your confidence?He's trying to deceive others by slandering my name so I appear less credible when I expose him on his threads. I notice all his hostility started when I begin selling moneypaks thus threatening his idiotic startup.
June 15, 2013, 10:16:09 PM
Quote from: Wikipedia
A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence scheme and scam) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence.
Quote from: Wikipedia
In criminal law, fraud is intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual
Tell me, how did Viceroy/buyer intentionally deceive you for personal gain after gaining your confidence? June 15, 2013, 04:18:48 PM
Can we address the fact that user: Viceroy keeps making accounts and trying to ruin my credibility with said accounts.
He uses multiple accounts to push his agendas and tries to act as if these "alts" are different people.
Of course it should not surprise you when you're the one that made the OP!
He then claims I'm a scammer because I use self moderated threads. Yet look at all of his "sales" threads!- self-moderated:
Now look at the links. Viceroy is fond of speaking to himself, especially in the third person.
I've decided to add this here:
I urge the rest of the multitudes I've successfully transacted with to come out and post and those who want to slander me to come out and post. We will compare and come to a conclusion once and for all. As you can see this thread is not self moderated so no deleting will be going on.
This is where he gets the accounts he uses to accuse me:
Him and BTCtalkaccounts ARE THE SAME.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226260.40
He uses multiple accounts to push his agendas and tries to act as if these "alts" are different people.
Of course it should not surprise you when you're the one that made the OP!
He then claims I'm a scammer because I use self moderated threads. Yet look at all of his "sales" threads!- self-moderated:
Now look at the links. Viceroy is fond of speaking to himself, especially in the third person.
I've decided to add this here:
Ive done successful trades with oldsport, and he seems a very trustworthy guy. That is all I have to say on this matter. I do not know anything about this case, and the accusations as the OP and OS were the only ones involved. Just wanted to put that out there, Ive done several transactions with Oldsport, and he has always been honest, and courteous.
I urge the rest of the multitudes I've successfully transacted with to come out and post and those who want to slander me to come out and post. We will compare and come to a conclusion once and for all. As you can see this thread is not self moderated so no deleting will be going on.
This is where he gets the accounts he uses to accuse me:
Him and BTCtalkaccounts ARE THE SAME.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226260.40