Topic: Need a loan despite negative trust status (Read 2267 times)

Well written.
I'm happier doing business with print. Glad to hhear.

Yes printshop has 4 assets, however, the 'failed' comment is not accurate yet.

3 assets are mining related and dependent on LTCgear.

Bearmining is a pass-through for LTCgear and has failed if LTCgear has failed, this is yet to be decided.

SafeHash has a guaranteed value in case of failure backed by USDbitfx and similar assets.  This was also dependent on LTCgear and printshop has been buying them back if people want to sell. There was one large (company?) investor in this and they may have wanted to exit their position.
See https://nxtforum.org/index.php?topic=6474.msg144131#msg144131 for buy back message.

dailytrade also dependent on LTCgear was released last month and printshop has been buying them back if people wanted to sell.
These 3 have only failed if LTCgear has failed, the dependencies were clear to buyers and in the case of the pass-through asset printshop was extremely clear about the risks.

The fourth asset KNS has not failed, in any sense. It has, however, suffered a set back due to loss of income from the other assets.

On the NXT Asset Exchange, Mining assets and their issuers receive negative karma for every delay in payment. Given LTCgears lack of payment it is understandable that printshop's karma would be more negative than positive. If you do not believe this just look at the LTCgear thread and the emotions expressed there (before moderation). This is not the only source of negative karma but I believe it is the largest component.

I expect cassius69 that you provided some of the negative karma, is this correct?

Edited to add refferences

i am not sure how their trust system works but it looks like his trust (karma?) is +80/-133 I assume having a bigger negative number then positive number is similar to having negative trust although I may be wrong on this

well known on nxtforum

he has issued 4 failed assets in a few months...

https://nxtforum.org/assets-board/(ann)-kongzi-print-shop

Don't state well known without proof.
honestly that makes me trust the poster less than whom they are accusing.

he borrowed money to buy 'hashie.co' which is out of business. this guy is a well-known asset scammer so beware (kongzi.ca)

This debt has now been paid.

https://blockchain.info/tx/3cd9795d2d33111a2b4ece93e4dfa1a3440994aa53cebd9a90b26f458fde6744

Please use this post for a reference if you leave risked BTC feedback. Thanks for giving me a chance when I was down, happy new year

https://blockchain.info/zh-cn/tx/221431ee3580f2f86068f41a733e07c79b0658996bbf68585dafb2cea1d2393b
Repay address:1PvdjK1qcmhZyRkwgmUtsm9vYMiQ3XEMf7

Yes, I already did what you suggest. I said specifically I was not trust buying, that isn't what I was doing, and I changed the OP to remove the restriction on having to leave trust. Although frankly, if you don't leave trust you're not doing your job, whatever. I made it quite clear that was not my intention.

Now we come to Vod. He has the gall to use the word "still" as in "you are still doing it" as if he had never read anything I wrote.


and


Vod can say and do what he wants. I'm done dealing with his lies.

I don't understand how your negative trust is causing you financial damages.  I didn't lie and I clearly stated the reason I left the negative trust - people can read it and still deal with you.  It's not like you scammed someone.

Are you maybe still demanding that all transactions come with positive trust?  That might be what is turning people off.

My involvement in this thread was to point out that you are complaining Gianluca95 put an invalid amount of risked BTC in the trust, when you did the exact same thing to me.  That field is not for "financial damages", it is for "amount of BTC risked".  You didn't risk anything with me.  Asking others not do something that you do yourself makes you a hypocrite.  

In any case, calling me a liar is not going to make me rush and remove feedback I see as correct.

Have a happy new year sir.

I took a look at the referenced threads where you were accused of trust buying and
while you didn't outright say "I want to pay for positive trust", the loan request was
worded in a way that was making positive trust a condition of the deal, which in
my opinion equates to trust buying.

 

Maybe if you apologize and admit the mistake the trust rating can be eventually
adjusted.

You caused me financial damages by lying about me. It is right and proper that you are left feedback which reflects this fact.

If you remove your lies, and I can subsequently get a normal loan with normal terms, then I will have no cause to state you have caused me financial damages. It's quite clear I am not trust buying. You screwed up, get over it.

But you didn't risk 1.0 BTC with me, did you?  You are a liar and a hypocrite.

No, I have confirmed with multiple lenders that I have been denied loans specifically because of the negative feedback you gave me. I have suffered financial damages as a result. Now, you can remove the false negative feedback you left me or not, but I am not interested in talking to you about it anymore. Talking to you doesn't work, so for the second time please leave me alone.

You did the same to me.  You lied and said you risked 1.0 BTC.  You should remove your feedback and apologize.

Hypocrite.   

I'm currently negotiating a loan with lihuajkl and will use this post for a reference.

Expected loan amount: 0.1
Repayment Terms: 0.105 (i.e. 5%) for 7 days (on or before Jan 6th).
Collateral: 50 USDbitfnx on NXT AE.
Escrow: Satoshi (see below)
Deposit Address: 1GbRySrYBF6wVyJuqDCX3bhFrgJzevZ9wr
Repayment Address: to be announced


The escrow funds have been sent: please see TXID 14402036590546183063.

Bad manners -- check the post under yours. Look no offense, but not only do you not know the rules of this forum (see the quoted sticky) you lied on your feedback to me. You did not risk 0.1 BTC. You should remove your feedback and apologize.

Yes there is an explanation, it was posted above. (Hint: look at the collateral I was offering and the reason I wanted the loan). In short, since I was able to offer a hashie.co account as collateral, and for investment on hashie.co, I was looking for a loan which my collateral would be able to cover. I only had about 0.5 BTC in the account so I was looking for a smaller loan.

Unfortunately Things are pretty screwy right now with ltcgear and hashie so I am out a significant amount of collateral. Right now I am looking at moving about 3BTC worth of USDbitfinx into LTC in preparation for a loan request from Twinwinerd. That would satisfy his minimum loan requirement. But that's kind of between me and him right?

Or would you accept $900 USDbitfinx as collateral for a loan of say, 2.5 BTC?

For the fourth time -- and this is why I negrated you -- just because I have capital in LTC that I could sell to get BTC does not mean I have no reason to ask for a loan. Read the Escrow FAQ located at the top of this subforum. You clearly are not aware of the rules and procedures for escrow and collateral. You should not leave feedback here criticizing other users for attempting to follow the rules. You really should apologize for your mistake.


Let me point that out more clearly since you have a reading problem. "A common question is why don't I just sell my collateral? Well the reasoning behind collateral is that you think it's going to appreciate in price or do not want to sell it, encouraging you to pay back the loan to have your collateral returned."

The purpose for the loan was announced as investment in mining shares (hashie.co for example). Please just go away Vod, I am not really interested in dealing with you anymore.

Think that in all case Redsnow and Vod did the right thing. Why do you want to ask with insistence a loan without offering a valid collateral? I think that I'll leave you another negative feedback because I can not trust you.