Topic: Requesting proof of trade between Zepher and TMAN[Zepher engaging in fake trades - page 4. (Read 6552 times)

Disregarding the on-going discussions in here, I think it's time to correct the thread title.

A third party has seen the proof of the trade, therefore the title is misleading.

Oh wow, I have gotten an awful lot of negatives because of this thread. I clearly have pinched a nerve in making this thread.

What the hell are you going on about? Where is there proof of me being involved in a possible scam, or being an untrustworthy person? Think before you type.

QS had no business meddling in my affairs in he first place. What right does he have to this information he is requesting? Answer: He doesn't. None whatsoever. Therefore I don't have to prove anything to you, or to him. Why? Because it is none of your business!!



I did decline. Once again, I do not have an obligation to prove anything to you, or to Quickseller. Furthermore, I do deem Quickseller untrustworthy, he has been excluded from my trust list for at least 6 months, long before I was put into DT2. Take note that I had not left him negative rep him prior to this, even though I deemed him untrustworthy. But coming in here and trying to smear my reputation? Sorry, I won't accept that.

Once again, I am happy to prove the trade happened to another DT member if this is required. I have already proven it to rmcdermott927.

The point is, why should I have to do this? This has nothing to do with ANY of you. My deals are my deals. Mind your own business.


You mean people like Quickseller like to troll people to amuse themselves?

As for "wacko DT's" - I don't even have a response for this one.

---

I am here to trade. I have been doing so successfully for ~8 months now, and have been entrusted with hundreds of thousands of dollars of other peoples money, and not once have I EVER done anything "shady". So this whole thread from QS was just an attempt to smear my reputation, which has backfired -as it rightly should of.

As for you, Sweeet, I don't even know why you stuck your nose into this in the first place.

I am done. Back to Collectibles I go.

This is something between Zepher and TMAN., You are not in the position to request anything.
Fix your Trust: -240: -8 rating first please.

So generally speaking you have more repect for people with neg trust vice those with positive?

Asking for proof when looking into a possible scam = untrustworthy person.

Its not about power, or authority, its not about scamming, its the simple fact that someone will receive a negative for asking for information when looking into something. This doesn't make them untrustworthy this just makes them nosy. This doesn't mean, based only of this thread, that person shouldn't be trusted in a trade or not. Zepher should have simply declined, not deemed him untrustworthy, thats not what trust is. It makes me think a lot less of the higher powers of this forum.  

What I've learned is that a lot of negative trust members have a "solid head on top of their shoulders and can fight a fight" compared to some of these wacko DT's.

Trades do not need to be public.  This is Bitcoin, not a tax return.  Not everything is required to be transparent.

With that being said, I was shown the txid for the transaction in question as well as a receipt for shipping for a zip code I know to be zephers.

You can think whatever you want about the feedback, but the trade is legit.  I have feedback without references from Zepher, blazed, and minerjones.   Do you want someone to verify those transactions too?   This is absurd.  

Yea, except that proving a trade actually happened to someone does not require the person receiving said proof to be trusted. Also as far as I am concerned until said proof if made public the trust rating given to TMAN was for a fake trade that did not occur. The timing of said rating is what gives it away as being for a fake trade.

I am also going to call BS in the privacy claim considering how frequently zepher reuses his vanity address implies that he is not serious about maintaining his blockchain privacy and even if this was not the. Are I don't think privacy is a good response to this inquiry.

Lastly zepher made it fairly clear that he will not give proof to someone "he trusts" considering he left negative trust to the first person who questioned him; he made it clear what will happen when the next person asks for any kind of proof of any kind from him.

He has said that he will prove the trade to a member that he trusts. Find a member that the two of you see to be trusted and I expect he will be happy to give evidence of the trade. Perhaps Blazed or someone similar would be a good choice.

---

And what authority does he have to do that? Can I request any information from anyone and simply say 'I was looking for scammers'?

All of this is only your opinion.

I don't feel the same. Zepher has left several negative trusts on users to which others would disagree with. He doesn't just follow the crowd.
In addition, why do you think that QS has so many negative trusts?

QS lost DT and received trust ratings long before any of this happened.

We're telling QS that it is none of his business, and now that him saying it is a fake trade is incorrect. If someone like Vod made this thread I would expect that Zepher would be happier to hand over the proof.

I think everything that is considered trust and not trusted on this website is completely distorted. Yea what quickseller did was taking away towards his privacy but all he was doing was looking for scammers, wither he did it for attention or not doesn't matter that doesn't make him untrustworthy as Zepher deemed him. Bringing up that it is ironic for Quickseller to bring these things up because he has done the same thing is childish, Thats like saying if you've gone to prision you can't become a cop. I find the only reason the Zeper would add a negative is because no one would disagree with him because quickseller already has so many.

Imagine if one of you DT members made a scam accusation against someone, just trying to make the forum scammer-free. What if the result of that scam accusation was you losing your DT access and receiving a negative? An accusation can be invalid, thats why it's an "accusation". If Vod made this thread, maybe he wouldn't but just say he did, you guys wouldn't gang up on him and tell him that hes wrong unless your the victim of the negative that he gave to you.

The thing I hate about DT members is because they feel like they have a duty to give people negatives, even for the slightest reason. The worst part about it is they would only give a positive to another DT member to defend them. DT members just need to relax, not everyone without three figures of green next to their name is a scammer.

In other words, the rating is regarding a fake trade that you have no evidence of and was given to help cover up the ramifications of an extortion plot that you were a part of. And you will give negative trust to anyone who questions you...

Quickseller's default trust has dropped from -64 to -112, putting him in the top 20 least trusted members on this forum.

Firstly, hello QuickSeller. Considering that you have a history of harassing people, I was wondering when I would get your attention.

You have been on this forum a LOT longer than I have, and you should know by now that the majority of deals that happen in the Collectibles section are never documented in the sense that a thread is created for each one. Go read through other high rep'd traders trust history and you will find plenty of ratings left without a reference, and a lot of the time, without an amount. This deal was done in a "backroom" style, as is often the case as I just explained.

I have absolutely zero obligation to provide YOU with proof that I bought this coin from TMAN, but if another trusted member wants proof, I will happily supply it to them. I don't consider you trusted, just look at your trust rating and feedback left.


Yes, I do use the 1VAULT address quite frequently, but I also use other addresses. Here is a screenshot I just took from Mycelium.



Not every payment I make comes from my vanity address.

---

Now, as Lauda has pointed out, I feel this is a total invasion of my privacy. Do you not have better things to do with your time?

I have handled over 200 BTC of other users funds since June last year, and I have never had one issue with anyone. I am one of the most active traders around here. So you coming in here and asking for proof of a less than 2 BTC tx is beyond absurd. Once again, you have zero right to request such information anyway. Therefore I will not supply it to you. By the way, I also trade in XMR now with some users that also use it, so some of my dealings and ratings will have been a BTC equivalent of XMR at the time.

Now - stay out of my business. Unless you have proof of nefarious activities, don't waste your time creating such pointless threads.

I will not be responding again.

Thanks.

Edited to change a couple of words.

Why do you care? Because Zepher trusts someone that you don't?

I don't understand you OP one bit. If we temporarily ignore what Vod said:
1) This TX could have happened at any time in the past.
2) The risked BTC amount doesn't necessarily have to represent a 1.8 BTC TX risk.
3) This is a weird (?) invasion of privacy.

---

I can't say how it is for the others, but for me it's quite common to leave feedback after a certain amount of time has passed since the trade.

Quite ironic, isn't it?