Topic: Quickseller/ACCTSeller abusing trust system (here we go again!) - page 2. (Read 3138 times)

I honestly don't see how you guys can know anything about what happend on coinchat so many years ago.  I can barely remember myself other than that I had a good time and enjoyed the fun until admin/tradefortress banned me for "abuse" which I didn't do.  It's even weirder that you guys would put stock in some weird likes that tradefortress made up at the time.   Especially given that he's a known liar and theif and I've basically got a 3 year reputation with 0 issues except this one.  Now, as to why quickseller is going after me, it's clear (read upthread).

As to whether this kind of personal vendetta is allowed for people on default trust (he clearly had a mission to get me removed from the signature ad campaign i was in) that's a question for the mods.

MZ, I only ask you to put yourself into my shoes, actually maybe that's impossible because you seem to be very careful not to cross anyone powerful here. But imagine that one day you disagreed with quickseller, nex thing you know he will find some reason to say that you are now a scammer---spending all night looking through 1000s of posts to find some kind of thing to possibly misinterpret.  Now, how do you want others to react, to take the side of the powerful abusive person, or to realize that you've spent years on here doing nothing but chatting and talking and helping and learning about bitcoin and which of these should hold more weight.  Think about it.

Try to find one issue that anyone on here has with me beyond tradefortress (known scammer), quickseller and his clones (soon to be removed from power, certainly).  There are many people who I have disagreed with (ask Vod, for example), but for all except quickseller, they know the difference between disagreement and using your power to bully.   Even quickseller stayed up all night looking through 2000 posts from me over 3 years and the only thing he could find was lies by a known liar and theif.

It may be weird but IMHO there is valid point for adding a negative trust though I don't know what's Quickseller's intention.

 - 2.5 years ago TF was in default trust list.
 - tspacepilot earned Bitcoins from coinchat using bots.
 - TF added a negative trust feedback and was in trusted feedback.
 - TF was removed and the feedback went to untrusted feedback.
 - Quickseller bumped it because that is a scammy behaviour.
 - Hence, everybody can see his scammy behaviour.

Leaving negative feedback for things happened long ago isn't unwarranted/unjustified.

Alright, here's my 2 cents. 2 cents is not a lot, so I will keep it short.

1) I think you abused the coinchat x years ago
2) I think it's weird for Quickseller to add a new negative feedback after such a long time


Personally I think it is unwarranted to put a new negative feedback for something that transpired long ago. Just like it is strange to post again in a long dead scam accusation thread.

@tspacepilot: If you were experimenting with bots, why did you withdraw coins you got from the experiment? Using bot is against rules, so you shouldn't withdraw coins you got from bot-chat.

It's a good thing that you're not on a jury to decide proof or we'd all be pretty fucked.  What salty says here, which is reasonable, is questioning why I didn't deny that I withdrew something earned by a bot.  The plain fact of the matter is that as this accusation is nearly 3 years old, it's really hard to honestly say why I did or did not reply in a certain way that long ass time ago.  What I can say now, as I recall clearly, is that I was using coinchat for chatting (not by bot) and gambling (not by bot), I was experimenting to make a bot (with tradefortress' help, teaching me about the api), and that he accused me of all kinds of random things after that (making up number, making up usernames, etc).  How you think this adds up to "proof" is beyond me.

EDIT: hard to believe that I actually stooped to the level of trying to explain to you whatever bullshit TF was making up about me back then.  I haven't even reread through that old thread because I don't want to give you any further pleasure from it.  Feel free to keep on quoting it if you need to, everyone here can see that taking TF's side in an ancient false accusation isn't making you look trustworthy.
/EDIT

What's more, I love how the guy who consistently drops 150+ posts per week is accusing me of posting too much.

As far as what kind of person you are, I'm looking forward your explanation here:


Pretty clear to anyone observing this that you went on a mission to troll me with your alt and when you thought you'd found some relevent skeleton from 3 years ago you necro bumped it in order to have plausible deniablity that you your main account just "found" this feedback in the new posts in Meta and just happened to read through those pages of old old lies and accusations in order to decide that I was "proven" scammer and you are somehow doing the community a favor by neg-repping me.  In fact, it's pretty clear that you're doing yourself the favor of enjoying swinging your dick around because you wanted to find some way to get me kicked out of my campaign.  As I said, you've succeeded, but only temporarily---once BadBear gets online and looks at this I have a feeling I'm either going to see that negative trust disappear because you delete it or because you're not on default trust anymore.  I'm pretty sure that BadBear doesn't want someone like you taking his trust as a way to effect personal vendettas.

Right, shills like LaudaM and Vod (so far).  Known shills ...

Well for clairification here is where it was proven that you were in the wrong.


I know you won't admit to scamming because that is the kind of person that you are, you won't come clean when caught doing something you shouldn't be doing but instead try to find loopholes to weasel your way out of it. You take no personal responsibility for your actions.

You do not care about the community. You spend 5 minutes between posts which is a clear indication that you are a profilic spammer, I would be curious to know if there is any evidence of you using a bot to post on bitcointalk, especially considering how many posts you had previously made in a short amount of time.

Incorrect.  I have not admitted to the "substance of the claims".  I am not sure how you would know anything about my alleged use of coinchat over 2.5 years ago or how you think this is relevant to anything other than you finding a way to get me kicked out of my signature-ad campaign, which you have succeeded in (albeit temporarily).


Incorrect.  I have other reasons to care about the trust system.  I care about the community and the drama on the forum and far too many times I've been an observer on massive drama about the assymetrical relationship that the default trust status provides to those on it.  Surely this is part of your motivation in this smear campaign you're working on.


Funny, you now say that you don't believe tradefortress' accusations but that somehow you think I admitted to them.  I can see why you wouldn't want to have your neg-ratings be a mere echo of TF's known lies about me but backpedalling to this is just laughable.  Anyone who takes a moment to read through that thread (why would they unless they have an agenda to try to find some sort skeletons to dig up against me?) can see that I categorically and repeatedly deny the accusations.

I think you're backpedalling to this now because you realize that digging up an old TF accusation is just making you look bad and now you're trying to find a way to save face before you lose your position on default trust (and, consequently, your license to bully).

1- you admitted to the substance of the claims therefore you scammed. It was not 3 years ago.

3- if you don't trade then you should not care about the trust system yet you try to get it changed

8- most people who are questioning my rating are shills whose opinions have been ignored (if they make any fact based arguments then they will be taken into consideration).

All your other points don't matter because the negative was given because there was a claim that you scammed, I looked into the claim, did not find the person making the claim credible however you admitted to the allegations therefore you admitted to scamming.

You may be right that a scammer is a scammer but anyone with an objective mind here will see the following very clearly:

1) that TF came up with some unsubstantiated accusations about me approximately 3 years ago and
2) the fact that I've got absolutely 0 other complaints from anyone since and
3) the fact that I'm not doing any trading things here (never have) and
4) the fact that you were running around calling me "an idiot" and
5) the fact that I personally disagreed with you in several threads here in Meta and elsewhere
6) the correlation between you're resignation from the signature ad campaign we were both in and the appearance of trolling alt ACCTSeller saying he was going to get me kicked out of my campaign
7) the appearance of your negative feedback on my account, successfully getting me kicked out of my campaign appearing within only a few hours of ACCTSeller's necro bump of the discussion of TF's false accusations
your intransigence in the face of everyone on here saying "wtf?  you're neg-repping a guy for ancient history accusations from a known scammer/liar"

All this adds up to exactly one obviously conclusion, you decided to get me removed from my campaign for personal reasons, ie, you didn't like that I called you out as a hothead and you found a way to get me back for it. 

>I am fairly certain you are the person who wrote the article that you posted.
Your opinions are of zero interest to me.

>you would be evading your ban which shows that you have a disregard for the rules.
Never claimed to be a law-abiding citizen, for all you know I'm just an incompetent brokeass hustler, like you.
That (other than making me a petty hustler), wouldn't change a thing, not as far as far as my posts are concerned. Those stand or fall by their content, not my username's reputation.

>You still haven't explained how this would do anything to do with the subject of the OP
Your alt getting tossed off the default trust will resolve this thread. Simple.

>how having an alt account is against any rule.
Having an alt is not against the rules. Having an alt and not owning it makes you a weaselly sleazebag, unfit for default trust.

This is a throwaway account. Threatening a disposable account with bans is a bit weak.
As is being afraid to admit (or try to deny) you're Qickseller's alt.

Then this is horrible. I don't know how I achieved this. I'm thinking back at the inputs.io days where one didn't get banned for spamming (I had no idea what I was doing).
Anyhow it's quite obvious that ACCTseller is the second account to quickseller who is on the default list according to me. I also see negative rating for tspacepilot.

Also there is something worse. One doesn't bring up things that happened so long ago for an apparent reason. Quickseller it looks to me like this was intentional. I mean it is pretty obvious.
If I was tspacepilot, I probably wouldn't even remember what happened back then.

I've checked. On the default trust list he is under BadBear.

I didn't trust TF's word, I read through this thread and found that it was admitted that the OP cheated TF out of an unknown amount of Bitcoin. The amount is/was disputed however I think it is pretty clear that that the OP scammed. MZ quoted the relevant posts here although there are more posts that point to his guilt.

I don't trust TF and don't like putting pressure on people to help/repay him however a scammer is a scammer.

Vod, any suggestions about how to fix this?  Quickseller is clearly intransigent.

IMO, I don't think anyone should trust TF's word.  He was a liar and a scammer. 

Actually, that fact doesn't remain.  That's an unsubstantiated accusation from one of the people with the worst trust ratings in history that you dug up in order to troll me.  Where you made your mistake was switching to Quickseller taking the word of a known scammer as gold and using it to fulfil a personal vendetta against me to get me kicked out the campaign thread.

This kind of behavior is going to get you kicked off of default trust sooner or later.

EDIT: can anyone help me figure out if Quickseller is on default trust directly (level 1) or he's merely trusted by someone on default trust (level 2)?  I imagine that if it's the former then I'll have to talk to Theymos or one of the forum moderators (does anyone know who, exactly, I should approach?).  If it's the latter then pointing that person to this thread may be enough to get this straightened out.  It's seems pretty clear that using default trust as a way to carry out a personal vendetta using the accusations of a known scammer as evidence is not how default trust is intended to be used.

I am fairly certain you are the person who wrote the article that you posted. If I am correct then I know that you had previously been banned a number of times and even started a petition for theymos to unban you (that didn't work). If I am correct then you will likely get banned in the near future if you haven't been already and you would be evading your ban which shows that you have a disregard for the rules. I am thinking you are considering that you posted this article recently in scam accusations and your account was quickly nuked.

You still haven't explained how this would do anything to do with the subject of the OP or how having an alt account is against any rule. The fact remains that the OP scammed and there is no reason why the community should not be warned when they are potentially dealing with scammers.

It's clearly not surprising that you don't find my groveling acceptably convincing.  I would feel quite proud of your negative feedback if it didn't have an immediate impact on a bit of additional income that usually get on this forum by selling my signature space.  You have achieved your goal of removing my ability to pursue that kind of income.  But it's completely transparant that that was your goal in the first place.  Why else would you have spent 24 hours trolling me looking for some kind of dirt and then rehashing 3 year old lies from a known scammer (one of the people with the lowest trust ratings on here!).

The real question was never whether you would be in a forgiving mood (if you were, you wouldn't have started this in the first place).  The real question is whether you're going to have any repercussions to your own ability to abuse people after this embarrassing incident (echoing a known scammer's proofless accusations and using them as the basis for your negative feedback).

@tspacepilot: I wish I could help you in this matter but well I'm aint a reputable member here and I also have a PPDO of 71.4 which proves that I am even not sensible. 

I would only request you to say if you have used a BOT or NOT on CoinChat and God helps those who help themselves. If you have any argument that proves that you did nothing wrong, then the reputed members can help you. I guess you received the negative feedback not because you had an argument with the reputed member but because he found an OLD case against you. Try to resolve the matter 

Well since you clearly aren't capable of pursuing an adult conversation I am going to consider this matter closed.

Not that you should care about any negative trust anyway since by your own words you don't conduct any trades on here. Feel free to continue to post once every 5 minutes that you are logged on