Quickseller is a dangerous person to deal with - avoid - page 5.

Hhampuz

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 6194

Meh.

Quote from: TECSHARE on June 14, 2019, 01:42:49 AM

Quote from: Hhampuz on June 13, 2019, 07:36:14 PM

I support this flag! Thank you suchmoon for the compelling evidence in OP which makes opposing such a flag quite difficult. Surely it could even be labelled as misuse of the new flag system?

See everyone? It never stops. This is how tyrants operate. First they punish you for accusing them, then they punish anyone who objects to that abuse. Its always more and more until everyone is in a little box they have the key to.

Can you tell me more about how that works? I might have some users that I'd like to... put in a box.

Quote from: TECSHARE on June 14, 2019, 01:42:49 AM

BTW, by this logic above, I could by your metrics open a flag for Vod for accusing me of lying in a negative rating and directly harming my ability for trade by doing so, and never being able to substantiate it. I would expect you all to support it because it would be no different from your flag on Quickseller. You see how this is just the old system? We have a chance to end this bullshit. Stop being petty cunts.

Go ahead and open up that flag, but if you do you best be supporting the flag on QS. Nobody is stopping you, really.

TECSHARE

legendary

Activity: 3318

Merit: 2008

First Exclusion Ever

Quote from: Hhampuz on June 13, 2019, 07:36:14 PM

I support this flag! Thank you suchmoon for the compelling evidence in OP which makes opposing such a flag quite difficult. Surely it could even be labelled as misuse of the new flag system?

See everyone? It never stops. This is how tyrants operate. First they punish you for accusing them, then they punish anyone who objects to that abuse. Its always more and more until everyone is in a little box they have the key to.

BTW, by this logic above, I could by your metrics open a flag for Vod for accusing me of lying in a negative rating and directly harming my ability for trade by doing so, and never being able to substantiate it. I would expect you all to support it because it would be no different from your flag on Quickseller. You see how this is just the old system? We have a chance to end this bullshit. Stop being petty cunts.

Hhampuz

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 6194

Meh.

Quote from: Quickseller on June 14, 2019, 12:42:28 AM

yada yada yada

I'm sorry QS. Not all of us have the time on our hands to be puppet masters Sad

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

Quote from: Hhampuz on June 13, 2019, 07:36:14 PM

I support this flag! Thank you suchmoon for the compelling evidence in OP which makes opposing such a flag quite difficult. Surely it could even be labelled as misuse of the new flag system?

You are a weak minded puppet. The evidence is not compelling. You are a thieving little weasel. You and suchmoon know information contained in the OP is a lie.

Both "B" and "C" listed in the OP are lies. Information in thread "B" directly contradicts how it is described in the OP. The "C" listing is a misrepresentation of the thread in question.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: Quickseller on June 13, 2019, 06:31:14 PM

Let me see if I am understanding you correctly. You are wanting me to remove my accusation against Hhampuz? This is your concern?

The flag is to warn users about your behavior. Removing the accusation would be a smart thing to do as it is completely bogus but I can't force your to do that nor would that change anything regarding the flag.

Quote from: Quickseller on June 13, 2019, 06:31:14 PM

I am not sure if you know this or not, but I have posted blockchain evidence both that Hhampuz took the money, and that he had an outstanding loan as of when he took the money.

Which means nothing. I have an outstanding mortgage and I'm quite sure I've made payments on it around the same time when I moved similar amounts of business funds. Doesn't mean I was embezzling business funds to pay the mortgage.

Added exhibits B and C to the OP.

Hhampuz

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 6194

Meh.

I support this flag! Thank you suchmoon for the compelling evidence in OP which makes opposing such a flag quite difficult. Surely it could even be labelled as misuse of the new flag system?

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

Quote from: suchmoon on June 13, 2019, 01:53:50 PM

Quote from: MoparMiningLLC on June 13, 2019, 01:44:17 PM

I guess what I am saying is that I would like to see some evidence of QS scamming someone and not anything that points to his accusation of Hhampuz

He would have a red box if a victim of his actions came forward. As it stands now, he is a high risk individual with a yellow box warning.

Perhaps if Hhampuz has a loss of business or a certain person in socal gets harrassing phone calls we can put a proper red box on him but for now this will have to suffice.

Let me see if I am understanding you correctly. You are wanting me to remove my accusation against Hhampuz? This is your concern?

I am not sure if you know this or not, but I have posted blockchain evidence both that Hhampuz took the money, and that he had an outstanding loan as of when he took the money.

TECSHARE

legendary

Activity: 3318

Merit: 2008

First Exclusion Ever

Quote from: suchmoon on June 13, 2019, 04:49:01 PM

Quote from: TECSHARE on June 13, 2019, 04:37:20 PM

Great, so you admit that this is not only based on his opinion, which is expressly prohibited, but this is also very likely retaliatory.

No, I don't, I have stated numerous times what specific facts this is based on. If you wanna have the last say - go ahead. I won't entertain this circular word play anymore.

Feel free to report me to admistration too for some mailing list treatment.

Sorry, but you are the one running in circles. If it is valid to flag people for making an accusation, all we have is the same broken system we had before where the trust system is openly used as a tool of retaliation for punishing users for making reports against certain users. I believe this is intentionally designed to subvert the intent of the system. The system is not here for you to punish people for saying things you don't like, it is here to protect people from fraud and theft. You know this, but you like other mall cops can't cope with your loss of dictatorial control and are clinging to it with every ounce of semantics and twisted logic you can muster.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: TECSHARE on June 13, 2019, 04:37:20 PM

Great, so you admit that this is not only based on his opinion, which is expressly prohibited, but this is also very likely retaliatory.

No, I don't, I have stated numerous times what specific facts this is based on. If you wanna have the last say - go ahead. I won't entertain this circular word play anymore.

Feel free to report me to admistration too for some mailing list treatment.

TECSHARE

legendary

Activity: 3318

Merit: 2008

First Exclusion Ever

Quote from: suchmoon on June 13, 2019, 11:25:36 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Time to start making some phone calls

Hawaiian for me. Thanks.

Quote from: TECSHARE on June 13, 2019, 11:17:32 AM

You aren't presenting any evidence he is likely to lose anyone money. Your beliefs are irrelevant.

[...]

suchmoon alleges: Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe

Due largely to the frivolous accusation against Hhampuz, I believe users dealing with Quickseller have a high risk of losing money, directly or indirectly, as a result of Quickseller's unpredictable and dangerous actions.

Great, so you admit that this is not only based on his opinion, which is expressly prohibited, but this is also very likely retaliatory.

"suchmoon alleges: Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with Quickseller is at a high risk of losing money, and guests would be well-advised to avoid doing so. This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and it is not based on the user's opinions."

You selectively omitted a key part of the requirements for this flag.

bones261

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1828

Quote from: suchmoon on June 13, 2019, 01:53:50 PM

Quote from: MoparMiningLLC on June 13, 2019, 01:44:17 PM

I guess what I am saying is that I would like to see some evidence of QS scamming someone and not anything that points to his accusation of Hhampuz

He would have a red box if a victim of his actions came forward. As it stands now, he is a high risk individual with a yellow box warning.

Perhaps if Hhampuz has a loss of business or a certain person in socal gets harrassing phone calls we can put a proper red box on him but for now this will have to suffice.

Theymos should create a special banner tag just for Quickseller. It should be flashing blue and red color.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: MoparMiningLLC on June 13, 2019, 02:17:47 PM

now I have some reading to do

and this is the evidence that should have been presented in your OP - at least that is my opinion.

I added this info to the OP so thank you for asking and giving me a chance to clarify even if this doesn't meet your expectation of "evidence". Note that according to the wording on the flags you can oppose if "you believe that it is at least partially false", which is not a particularly high bar so feel free to do that.

MoparMiningLLC

legendary

Activity: 2254

Merit: 2419

EIN: 82-3893490

Quote from: suchmoon on June 13, 2019, 02:12:06 PM

Quote from: MoparMiningLLC on June 13, 2019, 01:57:26 PM

ok and if no victims have come forward - on what evidence do you base your statement that people will lose money if they deal with QS? I will read the other posts above about QS when I get home. I again do not back either side in this. I am just curious what actual evidence there was. If there is valid evidence, I would back the flag.

Hhampuz had a business deal with QS. The link is in the OP: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51116576

The deal ended with QS being fired. A few days later QS started the accusation with no proof whatsoever based on the mere fact of coins being moved by Hhampuz and makes bold claims such as "Hhampuz has stolen the excess money from the BestMixer campaign for his own personal use". Note that he didn't use the trust system (old or new) to label Hhampuz and when called out on this he said this:

Quote from: Quickseller on June 07, 2019, 06:52:52 PM

I did not say that I wanted others to tag him as a scammer. I said I believe him to be a scammer, and the reason he has not been tagged is due to tribalism.

I do think he should be tagged, but due to the trust system being broken, I don't think anyone tagging him will have any affect any anything. In lieu of tagging him, I will leave this thread open and any potential customers of his (and his current customers) can look at the evidence themselves, including the fact that many of those defending him are being paid his advertisers money by him.

Which makes me think he's seeking to damage HH's business and doesn't have an actual concern or proof of a scam, which would necessitate feedback/flag.

Here is a partial list of other frivolous accusations QS has brought up over the years about people he has grudges against:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51387395

He took 20 BTC from a known scammer to sue Vod: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12406963

There is a clear pattern.

now I have some reading to do

and this is the evidence that should have been presented in your OP - at least that is my opinion.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: MoparMiningLLC on June 13, 2019, 01:57:26 PM

ok and if no victims have come forward - on what evidence do you base your statement that people will lose money if they deal with QS? I will read the other posts above about QS when I get home. I again do not back either side in this. I am just curious what actual evidence there was. If there is valid evidence, I would back the flag.

Hhampuz had a business deal with QS. The link is in the OP: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51116576

The deal ended with QS being fired. A few days later QS started the accusation with no proof whatsoever based on the mere fact of coins being moved by Hhampuz and makes bold claims such as "Hhampuz has stolen the excess money from the BestMixer campaign for his own personal use". Note that he didn't use the trust system (old or new) to label Hhampuz and when called out on this he said this:

Quote from: Quickseller on June 07, 2019, 06:52:52 PM

I did not say that I wanted others to tag him as a scammer. I said I believe him to be a scammer, and the reason he has not been tagged is due to tribalism.

I do think he should be tagged, but due to the trust system being broken, I don't think anyone tagging him will have any affect any anything. In lieu of tagging him, I will leave this thread open and any potential customers of his (and his current customers) can look at the evidence themselves, including the fact that many of those defending him are being paid his advertisers money by him.

Which makes me think he's seeking to damage HH's business and doesn't have an actual concern or proof of a scam, which would necessitate feedback/flag.

Here is a partial list of other frivolous accusations QS has brought up over the years about people he has grudges against:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51387395

He took 20 BTC from a known scammer to sue Vod: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12406963

There is a clear pattern.

MoparMiningLLC

legendary

Activity: 2254

Merit: 2419

EIN: 82-3893490

Quote from: suchmoon on June 13, 2019, 01:53:50 PM

Quote from: MoparMiningLLC on June 13, 2019, 01:44:17 PM

I guess what I am saying is that I would like to see some evidence of QS scamming someone and not anything that points to his accusation of Hhampuz

He would have a red box if a victim of his actions came forward. As it stands now, he is a high risk individual with a yellow box warning.

Perhaps if Hhampuz has a loss of business or a certain person in socal gets harrassing phone calls we can put a proper red box on him but for now this will have to suffice.

ok and if no victims have come forward - on what evidence do you base your statement that people will lose money if they deal with QS? I will read the other posts above about QS when I get home. I again do not back either side in this. I am just curious what actual evidence there was. If there is valid evidence, I would back the flag.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: MoparMiningLLC on June 13, 2019, 01:44:17 PM

I guess what I am saying is that I would like to see some evidence of QS scamming someone and not anything that points to his accusation of Hhampuz

He would have a red box if a victim of his actions came forward. As it stands now, he is a high risk individual with a yellow box warning.

Perhaps if Hhampuz has a loss of business or a certain person in socal gets harrassing phone calls we can put a proper red box on him but for now this will have to suffice.

LFC_Bitcoin

legendary

Activity: 3556

Merit: 9709

#1 VIP Crypto Casino

Quote from: The Sceptical Chymist on June 13, 2019, 01:42:36 PM

Hell no. If anyone is to be tagged under a new trust system, it is Quickseller and his alt accounts. I don't have a link to the thread where his escrow scam got exposed, but I'm sure you're aware of it. The huge problem IMO is that he doesn't even realize what he did was wrong to this day--and he's been known (AFAIK; will retract this if proven to be false) to use alt accounts as sockpuppets to strengthen his arguments in threads, which is very dishonest.

This is not a vendetta. This is a long-standing issue with Quickseller and his reputation. It doesn't surprise me in the least that suchmoon started this thread. If it wasn't suchmoon, it would have been Vod or someone else.

I don't feel threatened by QS, however. The reason for that is because it would appear that very few people of note take him seriously unless he's got very hard evidence of something. If he does something retaliatory, it's very obvious and laughable even. Frankly I'm not sure why someone with such a disgraced reputation would even be here anymore. Ah well, it will remain a mystery.

It was tspacepilot who uncovered it, I remember him, I used to speak with him privately quite often.

May I be of service with the link - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/quickseller-escrowing-for-himself-1171059

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

Quote from: suchmoon on June 13, 2019, 01:24:40 PM

Quote from: MoparMiningLLC on June 13, 2019, 01:15:35 PM

@suchmoon - I believe what the others are trying to say is that YOU need evidence to back up your claim that people dealing with QuickSeller are at risk of losing their funds - you made that accusation yet show nothing in relative evidence to back up that people will lose their money to QuickSeller - your basing your claim solely on the fact that Quickseller made an accusation against someone.

Amazing that for just yesterday you bashed me for leaving negative feedback on someone who falsely (with no evidence) accused me and 5 other forum members of scamming him - and here you are trying to put one on Quickseller simply because he made an accusation against someone and you dont like it....

I didn't "bash" you, I just said that retaliatory red trust is frowned upon and tried to explain why I think so. You're free to do what you like.

Quickseller's case is not comparable to yours. He didn't merely spam someone's trust feedback from a sockpuppet account, he created a frivolous scam accusation thread in retaliation to getting fired and has explicitly stated that he's aiming to cause business problems for Hhampuz.

You're welcome to oppose the flag if your disagree.

Your entire statement is a lie....

bones261

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1828

Quote from: MoparMiningLLC on June 13, 2019, 01:44:17 PM

I guess what I am saying is that I would like to see some evidence of QS scamming someone and not anything that points to his accusation of Hhampuz

Quote from: The Sceptical Chymist on June 13, 2019, 01:42:36 PM

If anyone is to be tagged under a new trust system, it is Quickseller and his alt accounts. I don't have a link to the thread where his escrow scam got exposed, but I'm sure you're aware of it.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/quickseller-escrowing-for-himself-1171059

And I'm certain there are plenty of delightful piles of "goodness" strewn about the forum, to step in.

MoparMiningLLC

legendary

Activity: 2254

Merit: 2419

EIN: 82-3893490

I guess what I am saying is that I would like to see some evidence of QS scamming someone and not anything that points to his accusation of Hhampuz

Topic: Quickseller is a dangerous person to deal with - avoid - page 5. (Read 3225 times)