Topic: @PrimeNumber7 is an alt account of @Quickseller - page 2. (Read 2166 times)

Up until this very day, his transgressions haven't stop and this includes this very case. Where do you see him asking or being worthy of forgiveness? Fool me once is alright, but fool me > 100 times is what we're playing now? He could/should/would have at the very least stopped what he was doing years ago were there any intent for honesty in him at any point in time. Do you believe people like this change overnight? I really wish he had stopped many years ago, but he didn't..
Would you have forgiven me for this many transgressions? Surely the fuck not. So why are we talking about this?

I'm done here, I know all I need to. That Primenumber7 is his alt. How Do I know? Well, I don't for sure, but I'd be willing to eat dirt if he wasn't. The way he responded in here spoke volumes to me, and probably SM as well...

/Over it, tagging and moving on....

I don't want to come off like I'm excusing QuickSeller, but I think LoyceLight makes a very valid point.  I say the following with the assumption (and belief) that PN7 is indeed an alt of QS:

I appreciate that he's not outright lying and saying "no" to your question.  I too value the honesty, and I would like to believe that if he came clean, I would see that as a step towards redemption.  But can I really leave it at that and give him the benefit of the doubt going forward?  I think I know my self well enough to know that I can, but at the same time I'll admit it's easier said than done.  Again I believe in forgiveness, but must remind myself continuously of that belief.

I think if QS comes clean and admits PN7 is his alt, some of us would allow him to continue his effort to build an account with which he can earn some income, and hopefully at the same time we can prevent any effort to build false trust.  I would prefer this scenario over any other.  But, can other members of DT commit to being so restrained?  I fear the answer is no.  Many consider his transgressions as irredeemable, and would only relish in the opportunity to tarnish his alt account.  

Conversely, if PN7 comes out and says that he's not QS' alt, I would not believe him.  In my opinion, his reputation would be tarnished beyond his current status of being not dishonest.

So I tend to agree with LoyceV here.  There's really no wining in this situation.  Our desire to know will not likely be quenched any time soon.  In fact I think it's a bit arrogant to expect that QS/PN7 (the biological) would make his situation worse than it is currently just to satisfy our curiosity.




Of course.  I don't know if it's out of choice or necessity, but it's simultaneously my mantra and my survival mechanism.  I am a conservative in California, after all.  

Nope... I basically stated that those are the reasons he is in the position he is in actually.. As I have previously in my comments about QS..

Actually there is a bit of false equivalence in LoyceV's statement, a rare feat for our resident AI. The possibility that people won't believe a "no" is merely a status quo, no net gain or loss for PN7 as far as I can see. So if that was the truth PN7 should just go ahead and say it.

And yes, I'm aware of the numerous cases where Quickseller applied the same logic and others just laughed at him. There is a bit of a difference here in that unlike Quicksellers cockamamie conspiracy theories, this link between QS and PN7 was independently suspected by multiple users.

So I had to try, he refused to lie, good for him, inconclusive.

For my part, I care only about the truth of the matter.  Therefore, what bothers me is the possibility that your “also” belief may be incorrect.  If (if) he is not Quickseller, then I am definitely trying to help him!


But what if he is not Quickseller?  His position right now is terrible, and more importantly to me, undeserved.  The flipside of my support for merciless handling of the guilty is that I am very protective of those who may be falsely accused.

I am less interested in looking for clues about a real change of character in Quicksy, and more interested in knowing if PrimeNumber7 is not Quicksy at all.  (And by the way:  If you are so interested in seeking honesty in Quickseller, please advise, has he, “Quickseller”, ever even owned up to any of his past wrongdoing?  Showed even the slightest remorse or regret, other than perhaps a regret that he didn’t get away with it?  No?)

That is why, although I do not want to imply some “he did not deny it!” style argument, I have repeatedly expressed from my first post on this thread that I wish PrimeNumber7 would somehow clear this up.  If he is innocent, I want for him to know that I, for one, will give him a fair hearing and urge others to do the same.

As LoyceV said, an obvious motive for an innocent party to just shut up is a reasonable fear that nobody will actually listen to anything he says—“people won’t believe it”—and moreover, a reasonable fear that anything he says will only be twisted and used against him, because he has been convicted in advance.  It is why the usual (wise) advice for dealing with actual police is to reserve your silence, especially if you have been falsely accused.

I like to think I’m better than that, and that others here are, too.  Perhaps I may be too idealistic?

---

You unreasonably minimized the severity of what Quickseller did with the self-escrow, whilst merrily ignoring all the other untrustworthy things he has done:  Shady account dealing, that reality-inverting dishonest BU shilling I quoted above (I’ve tagged BCH/BSV shills for less!), turning the forum into his personal battleground for extended, remorseless smear-tactic reputational warfare as revenge for his getting caught, etc., ad nauseam.

You continue to do so.

In my book, that is tantamount to condoning it—well, a half-step away.


Thank you for clarifying.  I still agree with what I just wrote.

It is obviously not OK to steal anything no matter the amount..
The point was that other reputable escrows, that are still reputable, have self-escrowed exactly the same way QS did..

The difference is that they didn't lie about it, deny it, admitted it was wrong/shady, stopped, and have remained reputable escrow..

It is/was not OK, but not irredeemable in itself, as suchmoon alluded to earlier..

Quoted for trying to make it sound like I condone "scamming/stealing" isn't going to work..



Happens all the time that accounts get slammed with a ton of red trust never having attempted to scam or scammed anything..
Look at TOAA.. What did he ever scam or even try to? Nothing..

When I think “bad-to-the-bones scammer” I think of much more serious and lucrative scams of noteworthiness..

I'm not trying to help him. I believe there is some value in being honest and I also believe PN7 can't honestly answer "no" to that question. FWIW I appreciate how hard he's trying to not lie here but that little detail is overshadowed by the entire deceptive sockpuppeting show.

When I “presume good faith”, I think it’s implicit that I am presuming that “PrimeNumber7” is PrimeNumber7 and not otherwise.  It could be far less damning if he were someone else, but that would not exactly be a resounding acquittal his questionable identity!  Anyway, it is irrelevant, for nobody (PN7 or otherwise) has alleged that he is anybody other than either just-himself, or Quickseller.  If you wish to bring such an allegation, please show the evidence.


Thank you.  Quoted for the useful knowledge that you consider stealing a purportedly “small” amount to be no big deal.  It suggests that I should avoid trading with you.

For brevity, I need not reach beyond that point to recount in excruciating detail all the other things Quickseller did wrong.  Suffice it to say, I remember when I first looked on BPIP and saw him competing with several long-ago banned accounts for the ongoing distinction of being the forum’s most-distrusted user, drowning at the bottom of a sea of red.  It is not a distinction earned by being other than a “bad-to-the-bones scammer”.


I know, but I can’t help it:  She cast an evil spell that makes me do it!

Have you no empathy for my plight as a hapless victim of witchcraft!?


I know whereof you speak.  I agree with Lauda, albeit only moderately so.  I think the whole thing was an unfortunate clusterfork.  Lauda is firmly on my list of inclusions, and will probably there remain unless she shocks me by admitting to popping Quickpills.  Indeed, I lie awake at night wondering, “Why does she not deny it!?”


Oh, please...  What’s next, hyperventilating about “Blockstream Core” as Quickseller was doing at least as recently as I quoted above?

(Otherwise, you seem to understand little about my political opinions; but that’s irrelevant here.)

---

I consider myself to be a philosopher first, and a technologist as a consequence.


I realize that I thereby expressed what is likely to be an unpopular opinion.  You have seen that I stick to my principles; and you seem to acknowledge that at least my principles are well-considered, even if allegedly wrong.  Agree to disagree?

Apparently it is OK to self escrow funds if amount is under $(insert number).

I don't think "dislike" is proper word. I am not sure why you chose words such as "hate", "dislike" instead "scammer" neither why you are avoiding to answer? Your account raised some suspicion based on circumstances, and if you can see, it is not only one person who think this way, perhaps, instead of this:





...you should have tried with this:

So much philosophical pontification!  Unfortunately no level of verbosity can convince me that "forgiveness" "pardon" and "trust" are conflatable.  Any one can singularly exist independent of the others.  You make an articulate argument, but wrong nonetheless.

[1] False logic.. PN7 could be the alt of any other veteran member and know things, even if not drunk like TMAN..

[2] "bad-to-the-bone scammer"?  What did QS ever even scam other than possibly a small % on escrows, depending on how you look at it? It's not like he is some infamous scammer that got away with a bunch of coin or something.. Unless you know something I don't?

[3] Man you talk about lauda an awfull lot..

http://HowManyTimesHasNulliusPostedLaudaToday.tk/ ??


lol 68 hits

You obviously have a lot more research to do.. Maybe start with flags..

I also find it very funny that you try to come off as some cypherpunk anonymous anarchistic idealist but can't stop blabbering you unwavering support of the greatest current authoritarian threat who would crush the liberty you portray to protect..
Shit don't add up bro..

Now, hold on.  I think that is an unwarranted conclusion about Lauda; you’re demanding fairness, so please be fair, too!

I will here presume good faith on your part, because I really have not yet reached any conclusion about whether or not you are Quickseller.  If you are not Quickseller, then you are relatively new here; and thus, to adapt something nutildah said, there is much history here which you will not know...


Quickseller is a bad-to-the-bone scammer with just the wrong combination of cunning, deceitfulness, and petty spitefulness.  After he got caught red-handed, he spent years waging a war of ad hominem personal attacks against his perceived enemies—most of all, Lauda.  Oh, and I should mention, he is well-known to use alt accounts for insidious purposes.

I only learned the history of that because I got involved, and spent many hours studying the “drama” you said you avoid.  I did that because I care about the forum.  Since I am presuming good faith on your part, I presume you care about the forum, too—and you must understand, Lauda is just trying to protect the forum.  She is grumpy; but she has spent years doing a thankless job of cracking down on bad characters who will say anything, and do anything, to get away with spamming, scamming, and other wrongdoing.

You may have noticed that far from being driven by personal hate to “refusing to exercise even basic good judgement, or allow for even basic fairness”, Lauda supported Quickseller’s own flag on The-Devil.  She caught much flak for that, because—Quickseller!  I don’t question her objectivity.  I am just a bit mystified because, as I should also mention from my own experience, it is very rare for Lauda to be wrong about something.  I sometimes do question her judgment.  The usual result is to find later that she was deadly accurate—she saw something I didn’t.

Thus far, I find this whole controversy inexplicable.  And I do hope you are not Quickseller; you’ve made good posts, and it would be a shame to find that out.

You know, I am not jumping on the “Why does he not deny it!?” bandwagon; and if you’re innocent, I know it is quite difficult to prove a negative.  But if you want to make this discussion more productive than it has been thus far, then I want to hear you out—and I urge that others should, too.

Their are a lot of references to this subject completely unrelated to the devil..

In the unlikely event that PN7 proves they are not QS it will be quite comical, but how could they possibly prove such a negative anyway?
If PN7 proves he is someone else that is not QS, you will all just probably think that user is QS too..

I don't pay enough attention to the writing styles of users to have much of an opinion on it other than somewhat trusting the opinions of other users here who do claim to do just that..

This is just entertaining and I don't really care to research their compared linguistics much because I don't think that QS is that high of a risk of scamming in average trades anyway..

A slight clarification: I know I am not the only one who have suspected this link for months, long before The-Devil even registered on the forum. This thread has only served to verbalize what many users were already thinking. To say that this was all driven by The-Devil's manipulation and desire for revenge is a bit of a stretch. It was only a matter of time before someone started a thread about it.

You forgot to call me a Nazi as well.

I never said I'm aware of no evidence, I just said I didn't need to produce it to exercise a fundamental right to which I keep my belief mine. Do note that I am opposing the flag on you. Try again next time snowflake.

Detection this early is indeed an amazing feat.

---

That's about it for this situation at this point in time.

It sounds like your hate is so strong for someone, that you are refusing to exercise even basic good judgement, or allow for even basic fairness. By your own admission you are aware of no evidence, but you decided to leave a red trust for no reason other than I am accused of being someone you dislike.

Sorry...


On principle, I will not become Quickseller for the purpose of smacking down alleged Quickseller alts.

---

Well, that leaves me to say, “I have been told by someone very reputable, and whom I trust that...” as quoted with added boldface above.  Because I will not say that, I must instead remain undecided as to fact here.

Although I understand the sensitivity of investigatory concerns, that just means you are still building a case which is not yet mature.  The cops can hold close all the secret evidence they want—until they are ready to bring a case up for prosecution.

I observe that this thread was not started by anybody investigating PN7.  It was started by The-Devil, for obvious motives that have nothing to do with protecting the forum.  Speaking of which...

---

There is another observation I wanted to state earlier; but I did not want to give The-Devil cause to gloat.  My mistake.

The-Devil has proved highly effective at manipulating others with a “divide and conquer” strategy.  In another thread, he sowed discord that resulted in the flamewar to which I alluded above.  Now, we know he wants revenge on Quickseller for raising a flag against him.

He can’t hurt Quickseller’s account, because Quickseller wrecked his own account years ago.  To really get revenge, he self-evidently wants to draw others into torching PrimeNumber7—regardless of whether that is right or wrong in itself.

If PrimeNumber7 is Quickseller, then The-Devil’s revenge is total:  He just destroyed a considerable long-term effort to build a new identity.  If PrimeNumber7 is not Quickseller, then The-Devil must laugh wickedly over ruining the reputation of an innocent person whom he also hates.  I oughtn’t need note that in the latter case, Quickseller would probably sneer at his longtime enemies for having taken the bait whereas he himself is completely unaffected.

The-Devil lives up to his name.

---

I had further thoughts in reply as to identity, reputation, and what would have been the right course of action for Quickseller, if he wanted to honestly build a new reputation.  Maybe later.

Sorry, I should have clarified. This was the final nail for me. I have fixed my post. I don't need to produce evidence for myself.

Wrong. He's avoiding to answer because explicitly answering is what caused his downfall the last time. Sure, people won't believe it but they wouldn't tag him either until we have another tspacepilot & BadBear event.

Would you ever believe that answer? Not et all. I have seen you judgement in a lot of cases. Trust me you were wrong. So, doesn it matter if he say yes or no? Not et all.