Topic: Quickseller escrowing for himself - page 28. (Read 33671 times)

Now there I think you're going a bit too far.  I agree that everyone should evaluate the evidence I presented for themself and I'm not going back on that.  But I think if you say that it "proves nothing" then you're missing the fact that .5 million words of text is not easily come by, and statistical analysis of a corpus that size isn't something that you can just write off as irrelevant.

I also think it's in no way fair to suggest that I'm doing to him what he's done to me.  I'm not on default trust and I don't want to be put there.  I do think that people on default trust should not be using it to attack people for personal grudges.  QS has attacked me with 4 different account now and has repeatedly attempted to smear me off of the forum.  I've done nothing but to try to stand up for myself against a bully.

When it turns out that this bully is providing himself escrow services and I come across hard, quantitative evidence of it and I present it to the public, that's in no way the same thing as using some power that I have (I'm not on default trust, I have no power in the current system) to defame someone.  I have presented my evidence and I ask others to decide what to think.  QS has done quite the opposite to me, he neg-repped me without presenting any evidence and when he finally presented his "case" literally everyone is telling him to drop it.  He left a default trust rating on me and refuses to change it despite the consensus of his peers that he should do so.  I have no default trust rating to leave and I merely present some facts I uncovered and I ask you all to judge.  There's a big difference there.

I don't.  

But then again, I no longer do BTC commerce.  I can see the validity in having a single alt to do business with, but I can't see the reason to have many alts, giving feedback to each other, supporting each other in public debates, giving each other positive feedback, etc.  Reeks of reputation building to me, and this forum RELIES on reputation.


I simply ignore sock accounts, regardless if they are on my side or not.  If you can't stand behind your words and you need to be anonymous, your words are worth less than mine.

The feedback he earned from me was not from any sort of abuse. Read the post I made that you have quoted... "looks to me he did said no." - I replied to that statement. This is why I try to avoid replying in these type of threads. I have nothing to even do with this situation...yet sock accounts are trying to drag me into it and question my morals

Why wouldn't I believe that? Most "scam busters" use alts on this forum when buying and selling to or from those they don't trust or don't want to have certain personal info.

I posted several times I'm not taking sides, just pointing out things others would eventually point out...  Do I think Panthers and QS are the same? I have no idea. I mean, QS has done a pretty good job outing scammers and based on what I've read, I would have thought he wouldn't have made it this easy to out his alt like this. What I am sure of is TSP's algo / script proves nothing very little and he's basically doing the same thing he claims QS did to him. Not sure why nobody else sees that though so maybe I'm wrong.

Do I think it's wrong for you to escrow for yourself? Absolutely. This is scammy behavior IMO.

In a neutral position you would've looked at the situation and evaluate. In this case your belief in QS makes you arrive at


even though he hasn't said that clearly. The irony in this situation is that you believe in QS, and he fooled you into giving him feedback on two accounts, essentially abusing your default trust position. I am sure if you didn't have full faith in him you would have realised all this long back.

Nobody is buying that lame excuse.

He could set a policy of denying his ownership of any alt he has escrowed for, and otherwise not commenting.

Then a "no comment" is not a "de-facto yes".

How have I bent my morals exactly? I clearly stated that escrowing for yourself would be wrong. I can not say that Panthers and QS are one in the same. Please explain where I have done something that is even slightly immoral.

You believe that? have you considered the possibility that he made that up to try and get out of a tight corner? Or is your faith in him is so absolute that you are incapable of thinking for yourself?

This thread has been fantastic. It shows how far otherwise trustworthy people would bend their morals rather than admit that they were wrong in their judgement (TC, Blazedout419, Blazr, xetsr). Credit to Vod for being able to see this with an open mind. If anything it would have been easy for him to fall in the same pattern as you as he is tageted so much.

He explained it better here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12348272

I guess it's because if he admits to owning the sockpuppet then he's admitting to escrowing his own deals which is scammy, and if he denies owning the sockpuppet and someone finds a way of proving he's lying then that's pretty scammy too.

Refusing to confirm or deny ownership of the sockpuppet probably feels safest. "Hey, I never said it wasn't me..."

Your timeline post was confusing. I read it but didn't understand it.


I'm not. I try to ignore it but you (or QS, I can't tell the difference) goad me into replying again, complaining that I didn't "answer your questions".


I must have missed your answer. I've seen answers like "I am Panthers", "I am none of the new users in this thread", "would it make a difference if I was him?" and so on, but no clear "yes" or "no".

Lol, sorry.....I think you still aren't typing what you are meaning to say, but I understand your request

Unfortunately there are really not any loans to be given that are not outright scams. You don't know of anyone who is looking for a loan that has collateral to offer do you? I only have ~50BTC, so the one 144BTC loan is little bit too much for me :/

Actually, he's continuing to refuse to answer.  He keeps trying to play these word games to make it look like he's denying that's his alt without really denying it.  He seems to be trying to preserve some kind of way to deny that he has lied about this while making it look to the quick skim reader that his is denying it.   However, his phrasing here is so painfully awkward that it ends up drawing more suspicion than if he just spoke plainly about it.  In that quote, he purposely says that I am wrong, without making it clear what I am wrong about.  We already know that QS thinks I am wrong generally.  My favorite one of these so far was the signed message from his saying "this was the only newbie account he has used to post in this thread".  It's hilariously weird because no one was accusing him of using another newbie account.

You like to twist words, but I think you know what I meant.

Please don't go offering alts to hold collateral for your own loans, lender or borrower be.  It's the right thing to do.

Thanks. 

Seriously? You just don't get it. You are now untrusted, despite your being on DT. You have admitted to being a scammer who is scam-busting. No? Do you get paid to scam-bust?

Seriously, get some mental help you mental wackjob.

LOL 

If I were to say no in this case, then in the future when someone does find my alt, when I don't say no that would be a de-facto "yes". If the account who I answered a de-facto "yes" on had items shipped to him, then a scammer could potentially find his address and post slanderous things about you.

If you had items shipped to your home address when you purchased something using an alt, wouldn't you want the fact that it was Vod that was buying the item to remain secret? If it didn't remain secret then your address would potentially leak, especially if the person you bought from turned out to be a scammer. 

Don't worry, I will not offer my account as collateral for a loan I take out.....if I ever ask for a loan then I will tell you that more likely then not it is a scam (I don't take out loans).

I will however continue to ask for higher interest rates when I am holding collateral myself personally verses what other lenders would charge who are not trusted enough to hold the collateral themselves

Ah good I really did not think he would do that as he knows better.

looks to me he did said no.


Vod is one of the best scam-busters too, y'know.

/day

I am not sure if QS and Panthers are the same, but since they will not answer it seems sorta obvious. Escrowing using yourself is not ok at all. Escrow is supposed to always be a neutral 3rd party. I really hope this is not the case here...

If it were me, and someone asked if so and so was my alt, I would just answer honestly with a no. 

I wouldn't play games.

But anyway, yes we can agree to disagree.  Just please don't go offering yourself as collateral for your own loans. There are enough escrows that you can miss out on a few where your alts are involved.