Quickseller, trust abuse, innacurate negative ratings, unprofesional escrow... - page 9.

tspacepilot

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1081

I may write code in exchange for bitcoins.

Quote from: EcuaMobi on April 25, 2015, 08:40:31 AM

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on April 25, 2015, 08:37:54 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on April 25, 2015, 08:31:06 AM

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

That's a hypothesis, I think it might be time to put it to the test. If it really were the case, it wouldn't be that hard to reinstate the trust-rangers.

Muhammed Zakir

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 509

I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!

Quote from: EcuaMobi on April 25, 2015, 08:40:31 AM

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on April 25, 2015, 08:37:54 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on April 25, 2015, 08:31:06 AM

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

He believes it won't happen and he is firm with it just to remove DefaultTrust.

Quote from: TECSHARE on April 25, 2015, 08:37:29 AM

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on April 25, 2015, 02:42:10 AM

Saying again, this forum and trust system is centralized not decentralized.

Trust system is designed to help others. People shouldn't judge people by looking trust rating but by looking trust feedback and reference. Trust feedback is necessary to know who to trust and who not to. Your saying tells you want to get into default trust list. I don't know why though. You still are trusted and can do trades. Just 1 trusted negative feedback doesn't make you scammer. People still trust you but somehow, your goal is to make Vod remove from default trust list like you stated in your thread or perhaps, to get rid of this system.

What people should do and what people actually do in reality are two very different things. People almost always superficially review a person and will move on to the next trader at the slightest question of impropriety. The Bitcoin community is a hyperparanoid environment because of the constant barrage of scammers.

EcuaMobi

legendary

Activity: 1862

Merit: 1469

Quote from: Muhammed Zakir on April 25, 2015, 08:37:54 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on April 25, 2015, 08:31:06 AM

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

Muhammed Zakir

hero member

Activity: 560

Merit: 509

I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!

Quote from: TECSHARE on April 25, 2015, 08:31:06 AM

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?

TECSHARE

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.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2926

Merit: 2348

Quote from: alani123 on April 25, 2015, 05:01:03 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on April 25, 2015, 03:37:50 AM

Quote from: EcuaMobi on April 20, 2015, 03:51:57 PM

What do you mean "get on the bad side"? If you have problems with other people and "tend to call people out" then definitely you have more chances of people calling you out too. But if you never had a shady behavior it would be very difficult for them to do so (unless they're just plain lying but in that case it shouldn't be difficult to have them removed from the default trust list).

Unless of course your name is Vod, then you are free to make up things about people and leave negative ratings for whatever you feel like. I never made an exchange with him or been suspected of shady behavior either and he claims I lied about him (since when is that an acceptable use of default trust?). He is still very much on the default trust list still abusing away at it playing rent a cop.

I find it amazing how much shit you guys are giving Quickseller when Vod does this kind of thing several times a month.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/vod-should-be-removed-from-default-trust-for-systematic-abuse-of-his-position-915823

Well at least with Quickseller we have the chance to have a look at the beginning. If you were to take a look at his trust ratings from trusted members, very few of them were from amounts or trades wothy enough to put him in default trust. At least not if you put him in perspective with other members. One could even say that he was purposely putting down such trades to earn that trust. Funny thing is that he goes after users bullying them that they're trying to 'buy trust' while he himself is probably the most shady person in the default trust.

He has supposedly stopped dealing accounts, but no one can actually guarantee that he's also stopped doing that from his alts. Tongue

What are you talking about? A large amount of the trust that I have received is from people I have not even traded with at all, but rather was received because of the contribution to the community by busting scams. The majority of the rest of the transactions of which I have received positive trust from people on default trust were either from people who had risked funds when trading with me (e.g. they either used me as escrow or they sent first) or were for transactions in excess of 1 BTC. If you seriously think that I am engaging in farming trust then you really have no idea what you are talking about.

alani123

legendary

Activity: 2422

Merit: 1451

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: TECSHARE on April 25, 2015, 03:37:50 AM

Quote from: EcuaMobi on April 20, 2015, 03:51:57 PM

What do you mean "get on the bad side"? If you have problems with other people and "tend to call people out" then definitely you have more chances of people calling you out too. But if you never had a shady behavior it would be very difficult for them to do so (unless they're just plain lying but in that case it shouldn't be difficult to have them removed from the default trust list).

Unless of course your name is Vod, then you are free to make up things about people and leave negative ratings for whatever you feel like. I never made an exchange with him or been suspected of shady behavior either and he claims I lied about him (since when is that an acceptable use of default trust?). He is still very much on the default trust list still abusing away at it playing rent a cop.

I find it amazing how much shit you guys are giving Quickseller when Vod does this kind of thing several times a month.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/vod-should-be-removed-from-default-trust-for-systematic-abuse-of-his-position-915823

Well at least with Quickseller we have the chance to have a look at the beginning. If you were to take a look at his trust ratings from trusted members, very few of them were from amounts or trades wothy enough to put him in default trust. At least not if you put him in perspective with other members. One could even say that he was purposely putting down such trades to earn that trust. Funny thing is that he goes after users bullying them that they're trying to 'buy trust' while he himself is probably the most shady person in the default trust.

He has supposedly stopped dealing accounts, but no one can actually guarantee that he's also stopped doing that from his alts. Tongue

Twipple

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 250

Quote from: worhiper_-_ on April 25, 2015, 01:55:21 AM

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/re-how-do-i-make-new-threads-1034655

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/quickseller-trust-abuse-innacurate-negative-ratings-unprofesional-escrow-1023038

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/quickseller-gave-me-a-negative-trust-without-considering-any-possibility-1035687

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/quickselleracctseller-abusing-trust-system-here-we-go-again-1032755

Well at least I'm not the only one. Quickseller seems to have really taken the role of the 'retarded policeman' up to himself. I hope that it's not going to be long before people in the default trust realise that he's acting so immaturely and take back their ratings.

He is seriously acting immaturely, He has this stupid attitude that he is always right, and if you start of by being angry towards him , which obviously everyone will be, after seeing the negative rep, then he will never remove your trust.

I am not saying that he doesn't spots scams or stuff, but when he does , people blindly are agreeing to him, and when someone tries to justify, he doesn't care.

TECSHARE

legendary

Activity: 3318

Merit: 2008

First Exclusion Ever

Quote from: EcuaMobi on April 20, 2015, 03:51:57 PM

What do you mean "get on the bad side"? If you have problems with other people and "tend to call people out" then definitely you have more chances of people calling you out too. But if you never had a shady behavior it would be very difficult for them to do so (unless they're just plain lying but in that case it shouldn't be difficult to have them removed from the default trust list).

Unless of course your name is Vod, then you are free to make up things about people and leave negative ratings for whatever you feel like. I never made an exchange with him or been suspected of shady behavior either and he claims I lied about him (since when is that an acceptable use of default trust?). He is still very much on the default trust list still abusing away at it playing rent a cop.

I find it amazing how much shit you guys are giving Quickseller when Vod does this kind of thing several times a month.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/vod-should-be-removed-from-default-trust-for-systematic-abuse-of-his-position-915823

worhiper_-_

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/re-how-do-i-make-new-threads-1034655

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/quickseller-trust-abuse-innacurate-negative-ratings-unprofesional-escrow-1023038

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/quickseller-gave-me-a-negative-trust-without-considering-any-possibility-1035687

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/quickselleracctseller-abusing-trust-system-here-we-go-again-1032755

Well at least I'm not the only one. Quickseller seems to have really taken the role of the 'retarded policeman' up to himself. I hope that it's not going to be long before people in the default trust realise that he's acting so immaturely and take back their ratings.

worhiper_-_

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

Quote from: cathoderay on April 21, 2015, 09:13:47 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 21, 2015, 10:23:40 AM

At this point you are wasting your time and are just trolling.

Like you do on dogies scam thread you mean?

I think you might be dogie in disguise tbh. Are you Alan Allcock?

Who knows really, this guy has sold and bought so many accounts. 'Quickseller' is probably his main but he probably does business from one of his other alts by now.

cathoderay

sr. member

Activity: 379

Merit: 250

Welcome to dogietalk.bs

Quote from: Quickseller on April 21, 2015, 10:23:40 AM

At this point you are wasting your time and are just trolling.

Like you do on dogies scam thread you mean?

I think you might be dogie in disguise tbh. Are you Alan Allcock?

worhiper_-_

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

Quote from: Quickseller on April 21, 2015, 10:23:40 AM

Quote from: worhiper_-_ on April 21, 2015, 10:14:50 AM

Can't give a definition to the terms you're using eh? Cheesy

Scammy behavior is something that is subjective and requires the use of judgment. However backing out of escrow is almost always going to be considered to be scammy behavior. Backing out of escrow while stomping your feet is always going to be scammy behavior.

At this point you are wasting your time and are just trolling.

How am I trolling? You're the one mixing personal bias with actual definitions in the English language. That's why you're unprofesional.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2926

Merit: 2348

Quote from: worhiper_-_ on April 21, 2015, 10:14:50 AM

Can't give a definition to the terms you're using eh? Cheesy

Scammy behavior is something that is subjective and requires the use of judgment. However backing out of escrow is almost always going to be considered to be scammy behavior. Backing out of escrow while stomping your feet is always going to be scammy behavior.

At this point you are wasting your time and are just trolling.

worhiper_-_

hero member

Activity: 700

Merit: 500

Can't give a definition to the terms you're using eh? Cheesy

alani123

legendary

Activity: 2422

Merit: 1451

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

I did say that you disliked him, but didn't say that you did before this transaction.

Also unsuccesfull=failed

Τhey're synonymous words. So maybe next time read a little bit more carefully so you don't put words in other's mouth and misinterpret what they say?

Also, define scammy behaviour. For me lying and misinterpreting people's posts is closer to scammy behaviour. And that's I feel that you're to be doing here.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2926

Merit: 2348

Quote from: alani123 on April 21, 2015, 03:03:07 AM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 21, 2015, 02:51:19 AM

Quote from: alani123 on April 21, 2015, 02:47:50 AM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 21, 2015, 02:23:30 AM

-snip-
no

You denying all the facts simply makes his allegation that you're unprofessional sound more realistic. Tongue

I have never dealt or even interacted with that person in the past. To say that I previously disliked him and gave him a negative as a result is ridiculous

I never actually said or implied that. Perhaps you're misinterpreting what I say.

Quote from: alani123 on April 21, 2015, 01:29:28 AM

ruining his credibility in the eyes of those that follow default trust for having an unsuccessful transaction with him is not required.

To clarify:
To me it seems like you gave him a negative rating for having an unsuccessful transaction with him while he never scammed you.

And you're telling me that he could end up being a scammer later? Is this a prophecy? Because he couldn't scam you or the seller in the transaction you were handling even if he wanted to. And this is not how trust ratings are supposed to work. Tongue

No. You said

Quote

What quickseller is doing is basically using his position in level 2 default trust to send negative trust ratings to users that he dislikes. It's kinda sad that the trust system has come to this

You said nothing about a failed transaction.

However to address your concerns, it is not only appropriate to leave negative trust when someone scammed you, otherwise when new users get scammed, the scammer will never receive actual negative trust.

The negative trust was the result of scammy behavior. Period

alani123

legendary

Activity: 2422

Merit: 1451

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: Quickseller on April 21, 2015, 02:51:19 AM

Quote from: alani123 on April 21, 2015, 02:47:50 AM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 21, 2015, 02:23:30 AM

-snip-
no

You denying all the facts simply makes his allegation that you're unprofessional sound more realistic. Tongue

I have never dealt or even interacted with that person in the past. To say that I previously disliked him and gave him a negative as a result is ridiculous

I never actually said or implied that. Perhaps you're misinterpreting what I say.

Quote from: alani123 on April 21, 2015, 01:29:28 AM

ruining his credibility in the eyes of those that follow default trust for having an unsuccessful transaction with him is not required.

To clarify:
To me it seems like you gave him a negative rating for having an unsuccessful transaction with him while he never scammed you.

And you're telling me that he could end up being a scammer later? Is this a prophecy? Because he couldn't scam you or the seller in the transaction you were handling even if he wanted to. And this is not how trust ratings are supposed to work. Tongue

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2926

Merit: 2348

Quote from: alani123 on April 21, 2015, 02:47:50 AM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 21, 2015, 02:23:30 AM

-snip-
no

You denying all the facts simply makes his allegation that you're unprofessional sound more realistic. Tongue

I have never dealt or even interacted with that person in the past. To say that I previously disliked him and gave him a negative as a result is ridiculous

alani123

legendary

Activity: 2422

Merit: 1451

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: Quickseller on April 21, 2015, 02:23:30 AM

-snip-
no

You denying all the facts simply makes his allegation that you're unprofessional sound more realistic. Tongue

Topic: Quickseller, trust abuse, innacurate negative ratings, unprofesional escrow... - page 9. (Read 16220 times)