Topic: Quickseller/ACCTSeller abusing trust system (here we go again!) - page 4. (Read 3212 times)

Hello ACCTseller, thanks for joining the discussion.  It's really sorta weird that you found it worth your while to troll through 3 years of posts in order to rehash lies of tradefortress.  It's certainly not something I'd be very worried about, except that your more powerful alt swooped in to finish the job and get me kicked out of the campaign I was in (again, based on 2.5 year old unsubstantied lies from a known scammer).

What's more, I don't do any trading on here (never have, probably never will).  I mainly use the forum to explore technical questions related to the bitcoin protocol, wallet software, importing/exporting keys, etc.  I occasionally take jobs writing code and fixing up people's websites but again, your trolling perogative wouldn't amount to a hill of beans if it weren't for your more-powerful alter-ego.  I like to take a little extra btc from signature ad campaigns and as you stated in my campaign thread, you wanted to see me kicked out (pretty sure this is because I offended you when I called out quickseller for being a hothead).

Anywhoo, thanks for helping me to exemplify the issues with the power of people on default trust to take out personal vendettas against people they haven't even traded with.  I'm doubtful that anything will be done about it, but I guess I can answer the guy on my other thread in meta with a more personal example now.

Once you're ready to log in as your more powerful alt then we can talk more about how you seem to think that tradefortress' year-old lies are relevant or substantiated or whatever you may argue.  Looking forward to it!

I am not sure what the fact that you think I am alt of Quickseller has to do with anything, nor have I seen you present any proof of this being a fact.

I gave you a negative trust because I wanted to warn people that you are wanting to make it easier to scam others, even after they have been outed as scammers. This in itself is scammy behavior, but maybe doesn't make it necessary for you to have a "trade with extreme caution tag".

Regardless I do think you are a spammer/scammer and should be warned, especially when you are openly admit to behavior that violated the terms of of CoinChat, made an account that was intentionally confusing to make yourself look innocent and then withdrew funds that you never should have received in the first place.

Quickseller is (or was, if it's was, then that's a very recent change) on default trust.  ACCTSeller was the account that was actively trolling me, Quickseller account is the one used to get me kicked from the signature advert campaign I'm in.  Presumably because of the disagreements with Quickseller a few weeks ago (he called me an idiot, I called him a hothead).

Who is in the default trust list and whose negative feedback has been considered as valid? Quickseller or ACCTSeller or both? I don't see these 2 on my default trust list and mainly I have the list which was "Default" when I joined this forum. My list is:

theymos (1)
HostFat (1)
dooglus (2)
Maged (1)
dserrano5 (1)
OgNasty (1)
Tomatocage (1)
SaltySpitoon (1)
DeaDTerra (1)
BadBear (1)
philipma1957 (1)
escrow.ms (1)
OldScammerTag (2)
Vod (-1)
DefaultTrust (4)
Smack That Ace (1)

Is this only list counted or even those members are counted who have been specifically added by other users? Then probably the list would be much longer and never ending and in this case, mostly many members' trust would be considered valid.

Thanks for the info about the index.  I think that the order of affairs here speaks volumes:
  1) the fact that I've had no interaction with ACCTSeller for many months (at least) and then the fact that as soon as Quickseller quits my campaign ACCTSeller appears in my thread and trolls me in every imaginable way
  2) no interaction with Quickseller during this trolling
  3) as soon as ACCTSeller necrobumps the old accusation from Tradefortress, the negrep from Quickseller appears within a few hours (with no interaction with me).

It's hard to interpret this in any other way.  What else does Quickseller gain from this except fulfillment of the personal vendetta which he seems to have taken against me (look through his history, you'll see him calling me an idiot, saying that I'm a spammer, etc).

The other thing I can say about this PPDO index is that in the case of ACCTSeller, the account seems to have been used for very little until recently when it was used for about 24 hours to troll me (it has now gone inactive again).  I don't know if this explains the PPDO numbers you point out (I'm a little slow and I haven't yet understood what those numbers mean).



Thanks for the support.  As you say, it's unlikely that anything will be done.  I can't imagine that Quickseller/ACCTSeller is going to respond to a PM request to remove the trust as it was clearly his goal to try to uncover something in my past that he could pass off as legitimate reason to get me kicked out of the signature ad campaign.  It's a shame that the trolls seem to have won this.  But I guess that time will tell (I've been around longer than Quickseller, I assume I will be around long after him).

Where do we find that PPDO stat at? I am curious what category I fit into! I did the math manualy and I average 6.3 posts per day...not a spammer/shill then \o/

I cannot say much about this fact, but I really doubt he will be removed from the defaultTrust list. Good luck with your fight, it will be really a difficult battle.

---

However  what is the purpose to leave a negative trust for a 'probable fact' of ~ 2 years ago? Maybe try to send him a PM and he will (maybe) remove it... who knows?

"Posts per day online" [PPDO] is a nice indicator of what an account is doing or if its logging in, posting then logging out again. It also highlights how much listening they do alongside their talking, ie if they're just hear to preach about something. Looking at the gif, the PPDO of ACCTSeller is just 12, while the quickseller account is at 35 so that doesn't really make sense to be a shill.

for reference, the really obvious shills can reach 80-110, while generally spammy members can also be found as high as 60-70. Most temperate members will sit around 30-40.

>110 megashill / megaspammer
80-110 likely shill
60-70 spammer / 'main' shill account
30-40 normal people
<30 sensible people

Thanks for the support.  I'd like to think that this kinda of immaturity would get him removed from default-trust but I sorta doubt it.

How is this guy still on the trust list?


INB4 prove it: Plenty of circumstantial evidence.

http://i.imgur.com/8KK6PeC.gif

INB4 why new account: Because accounts that bring up sale of bitcointalk accounts are instantly banned.
If you quote this post, your post will be deleted too.

And yeah, people are laughing at us.

http://s8.postimg.org/d4hal92o5/Capture.png

Not this again! I, and probably a lot of people are getting tired of these fights.
@quickseller How old are you? 5?
How about you drop the drama here. Now I ain't gonna take a side, because I wouldn't be surprised if I got negative trust as well. What you should have done is ignore his alt too, and just report the necro posts. There needs to be a line between disagreeing and distrusting someone. This makes me wonder if the staff (or whoever adds people) has correctly appointed members to the default trust list. There are a lot more mature and reliable members of the newer generation than someone who intentionally abuses trust due to a disagreement(s).
Don't you think so?

Trust isn't really moderated often. This is where it is a problem. People suffer the consequences.

So, hello again folks.  Anyone who looks through my recent post history will see that over the last few weeks I've disagreed with quickseller both over content and over how he addresses me (and others).  He not only got removed from my personal trust list but he also made my ignore list for a while.  Well, whaddya know, about 24 hours after he leaves the signature ad campaign I'm in, his alt, ACCTSeller appears and begins to troll me.  ACCTSeller trolls me for about 24 hours (https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/acctseller-357263).  He starts by saying that the stuff I say sucks, I ask why he's trolling me and he goes on.

He finds, guess what, some negative feedback from the (in)famous tradefortress from about 2.5 years ago.  He posts in the ask tf thread trying to get help to dig up dirt on me.  I say to him in that thread, if you want to know more, there's a thread in meta from about 2.5 years ago.   Well, he finds it and here's where I think he's made a crucial mistake.  He switches back over to his account on default trust and repeats tradefortresses negative feedback about me.  So, of course, my campaign manager says to me "hey you have negative trust now, what happened".  I say, well, this dude is trolling me, regurgitating the lies of a known scammer in order to get me kicked off this campaign for some kind of personal vendetta.  Of course campaign manager says, well, I have no choice, default trust is default trust.

So, here I am (and I sorta figured this was coming because I've been challenging the tyranny of default trust in other threads https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/trim-or-eliminate-default-trust-1031791, I kinda knew that someone on default trust would eventually take it out on me; interestingly, I predicted that ACCTSeller would use his alt quickseller to neg-rep me for nothing, if he was ballsy enough https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11140144), asking you guys why Quickseller's rehashing of 3 year old lies from tradefortress has any bearing on my ability to use this forum today.  I guess one thing I can do is get some of the folks I have worked with over the past few years to speak up about how I've never done anything untrustworthy and was even very helpful.  But in the end, I don't think I'll have much recourse.  Probably history will vindicate me, as it did with tradefortress (his lies were never removed, but eventually he was removed; I supposed the same will happened eventually with Quickseller).

Maybe I can leave you all with this question: is Quickseller's usage of default trust for some kind of personal vendetta considered enough of an abuse to have him removed from default-trust?  How bout the fact that as of now he's essentially echoing the lies of someone who was removed from default trust for good reason?  Certainly someone who is uncritically echoing tradefortresses removed opinions shouldn't be on default trust anymore than tradefortress.