Pages:
Author

Topic: Quickseller, trust abuse, innacurate negative ratings, unprofesional escrow... - page 8. (Read 16226 times)

legendary
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1032
RIP Mommy
[...]

the link in your sig doesn't work for me, check it?
BTW, just got neg repped -

Will state it's not true, whatever that's worth Cheesy

Accusations with no proof. Way to silence people...  Lips sealed
Why don't you bother to stop spamming useless posts and read the reference and maybe you will see that the feedback was not something intended to silence him, but rather was given information that I feel is credible that suggests that he is in fact an alt of supa

Post it, faggot Smiley

This is what the ref link points to: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11197886
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
[...]

the link in your sig doesn't work for me, check it?
BTW, just got neg repped -
http://s29.postimg.org/4192qia5z/Capture.png
Will state it's not true, whatever that's worth Cheesy

Accusations with no proof. Way to silence people...  Lips sealed
Why don't you bother to stop spamming useless posts and read the reference and maybe you will see that the feedback was not something intended to silence him, but rather was given information that I feel is credible that suggests that he is in fact an alt of supa

Post it, faggot Smiley
BTW, if I can prove to Theymos that I'm not Supa, will you remove yourself from the trust list?
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
[...]

the link in your sig doesn't work for me, check it?
BTW, just got neg repped -

Will state it's not true, whatever that's worth Cheesy

Accusations with no proof. Way to silence people...  Lips sealed
Why don't you bother to stop spamming useless posts and read the reference and maybe you will see that the feedback was not something intended to silence him, but rather was given information that I feel is credible that suggests that he is in fact an alt of supa
legendary
Activity: 2422
Merit: 1451
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
[...]

the link in your sig doesn't work for me, check it?
BTW, just got neg repped -

Will state it's not true, whatever that's worth Cheesy

Accusations with no proof. Way to silence people...  Lips sealed
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
[...]

the link in your sig doesn't work for me, check it?
BTW, just got neg repped -
http://s29.postimg.org/4192qia5z/Capture.png
Will state it's not true, whatever that's worth Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 1876
Merit: 1475
Scambusting itself is becoming a form of trust farming (not just by Quickseller). Steamroll over a bunch of people, pretend you stopped a bunch of scammers, collect positive ratings, and abuse trusted position even more. This is one of the main reasons I have argued so heavily against "scambusting" in general. People who are wronged will bring it to light, we don't need internet precrime police running around everywhere interfering with what would otherwise be voluntary transactions in most cases.

So are you telling there must not be any scambusters in this forum?

There would definitely be much fewer posts on meta complaining about trust abuse so of course it would be positive. The only problem is there would be so much more threads on scam accusations  Roll Eyes

Do you really believe that a handful of virtual mallcops are going to stop the tsunami of fraud on the internet? Doubtful. People who are wronged tend to seek justice and bring offenders to light. Preventative precrime type scambusting is inefficient, it also harms reputable users because people want to play private investigator and pump up their trust ratings by harassing people and negative rate them over the flimsiest of pretenses. They get entertained, they look like they are doing something to help, they collect positive trust, then use that trust to abuse their position even more.

Instead of trying to stop the ocean from flooding in why don't you teach some people how to make a boat? We should be focusing on teaching people how to protect themselves, not going on crusades looking for people to crucify to satiate the boredom of a handful of asshats at the expense of the entire community.

Of course having a default trust list won't eliminate all the scams, unfortunately there's no way to do so. However it certainly reduces the number of occurrences. I'm completely sure a lot of scams have been prevented that way and while there are several negative point it's absolutely worth having it until we come up with a better option.

Teaching newbies and everyone how to be safe would help too of course but those two ideas are not incompatible with each other.

And just an advice: to be considered more seriously start speaking directly without generalizing, without trying to put words on other people's mouth and with far less metaphors.
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 509
I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!
Scambusting itself is becoming a form of trust farming (not just by Quickseller). Steamroll over a bunch of people, pretend you stopped a bunch of scammers, collect positive ratings, and abuse trusted position even more. This is one of the main reasons I have argued so heavily against "scambusting" in general. People who are wronged will bring it to light, we don't need internet precrime police running around everywhere interfering with what would otherwise be voluntary transactions in most cases.

So are you telling there must not be any scambusters in this forum?

There would definitely be much fewer posts on meta complaining about trust abuse so of course it would be positive. The only problem is there would be so much more threads on scam accusations  Roll Eyes

Do you really believe that a handful of virtual mallcops are going to stop the tsunami of fraud on the internet? Doubtful. People who are wronged tend to seek justice and bring offenders to light. Preventative precrime type scambusting is inefficient, it also harms reputable users because people want to play private investigator and pump up their trust ratings by harassing people and negative rate them over the flimsiest of pretenses. They get entertained, they look like they are doing something to help, they collect positive trust, then use that trust to abuse their position even more.

Instead of trying to stop the ocean from flooding in why don't you teach some people how to make a boat? We should be focusing on teaching people how to protect themselves, not going on crusades looking for people to crucify to satiate the boredom of a handful of asshats at the expense of the entire community.

Nope. I believe a handful of virtual persons can stop or atleast reduce tsunami of fraud in Bitcointalk. We can't stop all fraud in Internet and I don't think we need to do it just like the staff here doesn't need to moderate other forums.* We can atleast reduce the amount by doing what we can.

* Exceptions apply.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
Scambusting itself is becoming a form of trust farming (not just by Quickseller). Steamroll over a bunch of people, pretend you stopped a bunch of scammers, collect positive ratings, and abuse trusted position even more. This is one of the main reasons I have argued so heavily against "scambusting" in general. People who are wronged will bring it to light, we don't need internet precrime police running around everywhere interfering with what would otherwise be voluntary transactions in most cases.

So are you telling there must not be any scambusters in this forum?

There would definitely be much fewer posts on meta complaining about trust abuse so of course it would be positive. The only problem is there would be so much more threads on scam accusations  Roll Eyes

Do you really believe that a handful of virtual mallcops are going to stop the tsunami of fraud on the internet? Doubtful. People who are wronged tend to seek justice and bring offenders to light. Preventative precrime type scambusting is inefficient, it also harms reputable users because people want to play private investigator and pump up their trust ratings by harassing people and negative rate them over the flimsiest of pretenses. They get entertained, they look like they are doing something to help, they collect positive trust, then use that trust to abuse their position even more.

Instead of trying to stop the ocean from flooding in why don't you teach some people how to make a boat? We should be focusing on teaching people how to protect themselves, not going on crusades looking for people to crucify to satiate the boredom of a handful of asshats at the expense of the entire community.
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
...
So you mean trying to bribe him to avoid/have removed the negative feedback? Sure that would work  Roll Eyes

You know what would work tho? Buying a trusted account from Quickseller.
Problem solved! Smiley

I doubt if even that would work. I would expect him to be the sort of person, who would keep reporting his own sold accounts so they would come back to him to buy more accounts.

Haven't thought of that, excellent business strategy! He already neg reps to create demand, if he neg repped the accounts he sold, he has a sort of  perpetuum mobile - an inexorable, closed-loop demand! Brilliant!
Perhaps I was to quick to discount his business acumen Cheesy
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
...
So you mean trying to bribe him to avoid/have removed the negative feedback? Sure that would work  Roll Eyes

You know what would work tho? Buying a trusted account from Quickseller.
Problem solved! Smiley

I doubt if even that would work. I would expect him to be the sort of person, who would keep reporting his own sold accounts so they would come back to him to buy more accounts.

I don't understand the logic here. If accounts sold by a person are reported as sold frequently, why do people come to buy more accounts from same person?

I meant, that I assume Quickseller to be a person who would sell an account "A" , which would have probably been bought for a signature campaign. Then he would repeatedly report the posts which aren't much constructive, leading to a ban , and the account buyer would resort back to buying another account from Quickseller now. Thats just what I assume him to be like, from the messages we have exchanged.
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 509
I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!
...
So you mean trying to bribe him to avoid/have removed the negative feedback? Sure that would work  Roll Eyes

You know what would work tho? Buying a trusted account from Quickseller.
Problem solved! Smiley

I doubt if even that would work. I would expect him to be the sort of person, who would keep reporting his own sold accounts so they would come back to him to buy more accounts.

I don't understand the logic here. If accounts sold by a person are reported as sold frequently, why do people come to buy more accounts from same person?
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
...
So you mean trying to bribe him to avoid/have removed the negative feedback? Sure that would work  Roll Eyes

You know what would work tho? Buying a trusted account from Quickseller.
Problem solved! Smiley

I doubt if even that would work. I would expect him to be the sort of person, who would keep reporting his own sold accounts so they would come back to him to buy more accounts.
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
...
So you mean trying to bribe him to avoid/have removed the negative feedback? Sure that would work  Roll Eyes

You know what would work tho? Buying a trusted account from Quickseller.
Problem solved! Smiley
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
Five quickseller posts in the first meta page. Tongue

Can't be helped, I haven't gone through all the threads, but the one where he gave a negative due to someone not agreeing to the final escrow did seem his arrogancy where he wasn't paid a dollar for his escrow fees. Maybe you should have given him the dollar to avoid the negative trust.

So you mean trying to bribe him to avoid/have removed the negative feedback? Sure that would work  Roll Eyes

Well, I didn't do any such thing, but I see profiles of some scammers who did, and Quickseller removed the negative trust from the accounts.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11203884
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11203952
probably many more.
legendary
Activity: 954
Merit: 1000
Five quickseller posts in the first meta page. Tongue

Can't be helped, I haven't gone through all the threads, but the one where he gave a negative due to someone not agreeing to the final escrow did seem his arrogancy where he wasn't paid a dollar for his escrow fees. Maybe you should have given him the dollar to avoid the negative trust.

So you mean trying to bribe him to avoid/have removed the negative feedback? Sure that would work  Roll Eyes

That would get him a negative trust if Quickseller was to do that. I doubt he would .
legendary
Activity: 1876
Merit: 1475
Five quickseller posts in the first meta page. Tongue

Can't be helped, I haven't gone through all the threads, but the one where he gave a negative due to someone not agreeing to the final escrow did seem his arrogancy where he wasn't paid a dollar for his escrow fees. Maybe you should have given him the dollar to avoid the negative trust.

So you mean trying to bribe him to avoid/have removed the negative feedback? Sure that would work  Roll Eyes
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
Five quickseller posts in the first meta page. Tongue

Can't be helped, I haven't gone through all the threads, but the one where he gave a negative due to someone not agreeing to the final escrow did seem his arrogancy where he wasn't paid a dollar for his escrow fees. Maybe you should have given him the dollar to avoid the negative trust.
hero member
Activity: 700
Merit: 500
Five quickseller posts in the first meta page. Tongue
hero member
Activity: 700
Merit: 500
It doesn't work like that. What happens is the scammer calls you a scammer with his sockpuppets/friends and keeps it up until you stop negging their accounts or they stop scamming.

You've probably reversed the roles there. I'm not handling several bitcointalk accounts, Quickseller is more likely to have sockpuppets any way. Also, I haven't scamed anyone nor could have had through using his services. Please stay on topic, hasty generalisations have no reason to be posted in a meta post discussion Quickseller's degeneracy.  Roll Eyes
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 1006
Scambusting itself is becoming a form of trust farming (not just by Quickseller). Steamroll over a bunch of people, pretend you stopped a bunch of scammers, collect positive ratings, and abuse trusted position even more. This is one of the main reasons I have argued so heavily against "scambusting" in general. People who are wronged will bring it to light, we don't need internet precrime police running around everywhere interfering with what would otherwise be voluntary transactions in most cases.

It doesn't work like that. What happens is the scammer calls you a scammer with his sockpuppets/friends and keeps it up until you stop negging their accounts or they stop scamming.
Pages:
Jump to: