I'll replace your stuff...
It's been nearly 7 weeks and still nada. I emailed them a week ago and have not received a response.
Topic: SCAM - Coinabul owe me 81btc - page 9. (Read 61619 times)
It's been nearly 7 weeks and still nada. I emailed them a week ago and have not received a response.
It reeks of SCAM to me.
With reference to BadBear's passage about not wanting to hand out the scammer tag because its like "pushing over a cliff after tripping on a rock" I don't think that tis is right:
If I set up an eBay business where I take orders and legitmately deliver 80% of them, to maintain my rating, just enough so that people trust me, but are purposefully (read: knowledgebly) not sending out other orders, this is a prime SCAM.
Just my 2 mBTC
With reference to BadBear's passage about not wanting to hand out the scammer tag because its like "pushing over a cliff after tripping on a rock" I don't think that tis is right:
If I set up an eBay business where I take orders and legitmately deliver 80% of them, to maintain my rating, just enough so that people trust me, but are purposefully (read: knowledgebly) not sending out other orders, this is a prime SCAM.
Just my 2 mBTC
That is one possible scenario, and of that were the case I'd be inclined to agree with you. Hard to prove something like that though.
Fair enough, and I guess you guys are not the police or anything... Just have to go with what evidence you have I suppose
It reeks of SCAM to me.
With reference to BadBear's passage about not wanting to hand out the scammer tag because its like "pushing over a cliff after tripping on a rock" I don't think that tis is right:
If I set up an eBay business where I take orders and legitmately deliver 80% of them, to maintain my rating, just enough so that people trust me, but are purposefully (read: knowledgebly) not sending out other orders, this is a prime SCAM.
Just my 2 mBTC
With reference to BadBear's passage about not wanting to hand out the scammer tag because its like "pushing over a cliff after tripping on a rock" I don't think that tis is right:
If I set up an eBay business where I take orders and legitmately deliver 80% of them, to maintain my rating, just enough so that people trust me, but are purposefully (read: knowledgebly) not sending out other orders, this is a prime SCAM.
Just my 2 mBTC
That is one possible scenario, and of that were the case I'd be inclined to agree with you. Hard to prove something like that though.
It reeks of SCAM to me.
With reference to BadBear's passage about not wanting to hand out the scammer tag because its like "pushing over a cliff after tripping on a rock" I don't think that tis is right:
If I set up an eBay business where I take orders and legitmately deliver 80% of them, to maintain my rating, just enough so that people trust me, but are purposefully (read: knowledgebly) not sending out other orders, this is a prime SCAM.
Just my 2 mBTC
With reference to BadBear's passage about not wanting to hand out the scammer tag because its like "pushing over a cliff after tripping on a rock" I don't think that tis is right:
If I set up an eBay business where I take orders and legitmately deliver 80% of them, to maintain my rating, just enough so that people trust me, but are purposefully (read: knowledgebly) not sending out other orders, this is a prime SCAM.
Just my 2 mBTC
Still nothing on my order...
Perhaps I define "scam" more narrowly than others here, but to me, for something to be a scam, it has to be intentional. If you try to enter an agreement with someone and events occur which prevents one party from upholding their end of the bargian, or if someone make a mistake and accepts more orders than they can process quickly, or even if they just forget, it's not a scam, it's just bad business. Of course "bad business" might deserve a tag on here as well, as it is just as important to warn others about.
Say a person offers a $1 million meteor strike insurance policy for $15. He figures the odds he'll need to pay out are near zero and he'd like to have $15. He expect to be able to keep his end of the bargain simply by doing nothing. If he takes the $15, a meteor strikes, and he says, "Damn, I never expected that to happen. Sorry I can't make good. I don't have a million dollars." is he a scammer?
No surprise by now of course, but with Coinabul it's heads they win, tails you lose.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/warning-coinabul-trying-to-defraud-customers-181662
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/warning-coinabul-trying-to-defraud-customers-181662
We can post our private shitlist in public, can't we? (I mean, is it forbidden by the forum rules?) Just start a self-moderated thread on who in your opinion are scammers.
If you are powerful enough, people will just follow your thread, in addition to the SCAMMER tags (not) doled out by the administration of the forum. Or start your own forum. Bitcoin is open-source, and many people have yet to grasp the true significance of it.
If you are powerful enough, people will just follow your thread, in addition to the SCAMMER tags (not) doled out by the administration of the forum. Or start your own forum. Bitcoin is open-source, and many people have yet to grasp the true significance of it.
No it's not against the rules, I think it's a good idea.
We can post our private shitlist in public, can't we? (I mean, is it forbidden by the forum rules?) Just start a self-moderated thread on who in your opinion are scammers.
If you are powerful enough, people will just follow your thread, in addition to the SCAMMER tags (not) doled out by the administration of the forum. Or start your own forum. Bitcoin is open-source, and many people have yet to grasp the true significance of it.
If you are powerful enough, people will just follow your thread, in addition to the SCAMMER tags (not) doled out by the administration of the forum. Or start your own forum. Bitcoin is open-source, and many people have yet to grasp the true significance of it.
When you refuse to set rules about who gets the tag and then you only give it out if mods get scammed it looks pretty bad.
This isn't the case. I've been involved in helping identify or resolve three separate scammer tag situations, all three of which had nothing to do with moderators getting scammed. Two of them didn't involve VIP or donators even getting scammed (nor would that be a factor in my determination to look into them). That said, it seems pretty clear given the evidence in this thread that Coinabul needs a scammer tag and I find it disturbing that one has not been given out. It seems as if the factors for determining if someone has been scammed has now somehow changed in the last 6 months.
As Casascius indicated, when your reputation is on the line, you should be willing to eat a few losses. Continuing to do business while your reputation is "under dispute" (New tag mechanism, anyone?) is warrant for a scammer tag, IMHO.
Moderators aren't your private nanny.
Then why do they bother with scammer tags in the first place?
I bothered because I wanted to help, warn people, and see people get what they deserve. It just causes drama, grief, whining, etc. so I just don't bother anymore, at least not publicly.
So scammer tags are like push-to-cross buttons in NYC? They don't really do anything but just cause confusion and you don't actually hand them out anymore? As long as people see people with scammer tags, expect people to ask that scammers receive scammer tags.
I'm just a single mod, not the forum, and I don't speak for the other mods. There are tags still being handed out, and there are others working on scammer tags.
I don't think a scammer tag is the right answer for situations like this. It's why I favor a reputation based system over scammer tags. When a company has so many positive transactions, to ruin their reputation over a couple bad incidents when they may be understaffed/overworked/whatever, seems a bit like shoving them over the cliff because they tripped on a stone. I said something similar about BFL a couple weeks ago.
Asking for a scammer tag is a little premature, it isn't obviously a scam, just looks like some incompetent boobs who have very little experience, and at least they have delivered in the past. Handing out scammer tags every time someone doesn't meet a deadline is just going to drive businesses away and may even dissuade people from trying new ideas or funding that new start-up that looks promising.
We should be encouraging businesses and new innovations, not shrieking for scammer tags over customer service issues or terrible PR, or missed deadlines (although I'll admit it is getting a bit ridiculous)....
We should be encouraging businesses and new innovations, not shrieking for scammer tags over customer service issues or terrible PR, or missed deadlines (although I'll admit it is getting a bit ridiculous)....
Can't you just give him the scammer tag until he pays the silver? Making someone wait over a month after he's already waited months for something he should of had in less than a week is really rude. I think a scammer tag would be perfect because that way Coinabul would be taking this situation a lot more seriously than they are right now.
Anyway, back on topic.
Situations like this are why I favor a reputation based system over scammer tags. When a company has so many positive transactions, to ruin their reputation over a couple bad incidents when they may be understaffed/overworked/whatever, seems a bit like shoving them over the cliff because they tripped on a stone. I said something similar about BFL a couple weeks ago.
Situations like this are why I favor a reputation based system over scammer tags. When a company has so many positive transactions, to ruin their reputation over a couple bad incidents when they may be understaffed/overworked/whatever, seems a bit like shoving them over the cliff because they tripped on a stone. I said something similar about BFL a couple weeks ago.
Asking for a scammer tag is a little premature, it isn't obviously a scam, just looks like some incompetent boobs who have very little experience, and at least they have delivered in the past. Handing out scammer tags every time someone doesn't meet a deadline is just going to drive businesses away and may even dissuade people from trying new ideas or funding that new start-up that looks promising.
We should be encouraging businesses and new innovations, not shrieking for scammer tags over customer service issues or terrible PR, or missed deadlines (although I'll admit it is getting a bit ridiculous)....
We should be encouraging businesses and new innovations, not shrieking for scammer tags over customer service issues or terrible PR, or missed deadlines (although I'll admit it is getting a bit ridiculous)....
I thinking losing someone's silver and then pushing them into the "when they have extra time" bin is a little bit more than tripping on a stone. It is certainly indicative of them being overworked/understaffed though, but it does make me wonder exactly why they're giving him such low priority.
Regarding BFL, as a customer I expect to receive 60GH/s and they seem intent on delivering it.
Update time since it has been 3 weeks since Jay's post.
I received an email on March 30 from Jay advising that his shipping staff will ship my silver 'when they have extra time'. They are apparently very busy at the moment and my order is low priority.
Will update on further info.
I received an email on March 30 from Jay advising that his shipping staff will ship my silver 'when they have extra time'. They are apparently very busy at the moment and my order is low priority.
Will update on further info.
So scammer tags are like push-to-cross buttons in NYC? They don't really do anything but just cause confusion and you don't actually hand them out anymore? As long as people see people with scammer tags, expect people to ask that scammers receive scammer tags.
I'm just a single mod, not the forum, and I don't speak for the other mods. There are tags still being handed out, and there are others working on scammer tags.
I don't think a scammer tag is the right answer for situations like this. It's why I favor a reputation based system over scammer tags. When a company has so many positive transactions, to ruin their reputation over a couple bad incidents when they may be understaffed/overworked/whatever, seems a bit like shoving them over the cliff because they tripped on a stone. I said something similar about BFL a couple weeks ago.
Asking for a scammer tag is a little premature, it isn't obviously a scam, just looks like some incompetent boobs who have very little experience, and at least they have delivered in the past. Handing out scammer tags every time someone doesn't meet a deadline is just going to drive businesses away and may even dissuade people from trying new ideas or funding that new start-up that looks promising.
We should be encouraging businesses and new innovations, not shrieking for scammer tags over customer service issues or terrible PR, or missed deadlines (although I'll admit it is getting a bit ridiculous)....
We should be encouraging businesses and new innovations, not shrieking for scammer tags over customer service issues or terrible PR, or missed deadlines (although I'll admit it is getting a bit ridiculous)....
Moderators aren't your private nanny.
Then why do they bother with scammer tags in the first place?
I bothered because I wanted to help, warn people, and see people get what they deserve. It just causes drama, grief, whining, etc. so I just don't bother anymore, at least not publicly.
So scammer tags are like push-to-cross buttons in NYC? They don't really do anything but just cause confusion and you don't actually hand them out anymore? As long as people see people with scammer tags, expect people to ask that scammers receive scammer tags.
See? Some people just can't handle others having differing opinions, and also can't have a constructive conversation about it, and choose instead to resort to attacks. It's unfortunate state of affairs.
Then why do they bother with scammer tags in the first place?
I bothered because I wanted to help, warn people, and see people get what they deserve. It just causes drama, grief, whining, etc. so I just don't bother anymore, at least not publicly.
When you abuse your trust and do it selectivly people will always react that way.
Moderators aren't your private nanny.
Then why do they bother with scammer tags in the first place?
I bothered because I wanted to help, warn people, and see people get what they deserve. It just causes drama, grief, whining, etc. so I just don't bother anymore, at least not publicly.
When you abuse your trust and do it selectivly people will always react that way.
Moderators aren't your private nanny.
Then why do they bother with scammer tags in the first place?
I bothered because I wanted to help, warn people, and see people get what they deserve. It just causes drama, grief, whining, etc. so I just don't bother anymore, at least not publicly.
Lets get back on topic. What is the current status, and proof of either side being right or wrong?
Current status: Jay offered to replace my silver a bit over a month ago. Still waiting.
Lets get back on topic. What is the current status, and proof of either side being right or wrong?
Moderators aren't your private nanny.
Then why do they bother with scammer tags in the first place?
You can see they stopped bothering like they used to.
Jump to: