Pages:
Author

Topic: Scammer: Dank - page 8. (Read 14368 times)

sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 250
October 10, 2012, 08:12:24 PM
#88
You are clearly the one who has no understanding of how business is done.  It is good that is the last you have to say on this since you have added nothing and are clearly an ignoramus.  We had a written agreement for the exchange of goods and services in which a fraudulent attempt to deliver was made.  It is a scam, even if actual real money like Bitcoins has not been exchanged the products in question have monetary value.

It's so funny when someone starts out a troll thread and ends up taking it seriously.

Please exit the thread if all you wish to do is call the authenticity of my attempts to pursue justice into question.  This is a very serious matter for me and has been from the start.  I would not have agreed to cease my efforts to warn members of the forum of some of the dangers of investing with Dank in exchange for this personalized performance if I did not have a strong a legitimate need to do so in order to make my niece happy.  


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law


That aside, as ridiculous in size this is compared to what's happening out there, for justice's sake, if things went as described, I'd say Dank has earned a tag.

...though, what we would really need is the possibility of changing only some of the coins to Xs, probably!  Grin
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
Look upon me, BitcoinTalk, for I...am...Rarity!
October 10, 2012, 07:52:19 PM
#87
You are clearly the one who has no understanding of how business is done.  It is good that is the last you have to say on this since you have added nothing and are clearly an ignoramus.  We had a written agreement for the exchange of goods and services in which a fraudulent attempt to deliver was made.  It is a scam, even if actual real money like Bitcoins has not been exchanged the products in question have monetary value.

It's so funny when someone starts out a troll thread and ends up taking it seriously.

Please exit the thread if all you wish to do is call the authenticity of my attempts to pursue justice into question.  This is a very serious matter for me and has been from the start.  I would not have agreed to cease my efforts to warn members of the forum of some of the dangers of investing with Dank in exchange for this personalized performance if I did not have a strong a legitimate need to do so in order to make my niece happy.  
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
October 10, 2012, 07:47:56 PM
#86
You are clearly the one who has no understanding of how business is done.  It is good that is the last you have to say on this since you have added nothing and are clearly an ignoramus.  We had a written agreement for the exchange of goods and services in which a fraudulent attempt to deliver was made.  It is a scam, even if actual real money like Bitcoins has not been exchanged the products in question have monetary value.

It's so funny when someone starts out a troll thread and ends up taking it seriously.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
October 10, 2012, 07:46:21 PM
#85
It sounds like Kurt Cobain playing Mary Had a Little Lamb to me...  Huh

Not sure what the issue is?

-Zoey

I actually dug up Cobain's corpse yesterday and repeatedly beat him over the head with a guitar using the amp (with way too much clipping) as an anvil while singing Mary Had A Little Lamb. It sounded exactly like this.

It's not nice to speak ill of the dead this way.  Angry

He may have had a problem with heroin, but it's not as big of a deal as people think it is. That's just what made him who he is. He had stomach problems too, which I'm sure the H helped a great deal. Quite a few of us have been there with regards to opiates.

-Zoey
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
Look upon me, BitcoinTalk, for I...am...Rarity!
October 10, 2012, 07:31:15 PM
#84
You are clearly the one who has no understanding of how business is done.  It is good that is the last you have to say on this since you have added nothing and are clearly an ignoramus.  We had a written agreement for the exchange of goods and services in which a fraudulent attempt to deliver was made.  It is a scam, even if actual real money like Bitcoins has not been exchanged the products in question have monetary value.
legendary
Activity: 1064
Merit: 1001
October 10, 2012, 07:16:54 PM
#83
Rarity should be the one receiving the scammer for starting this shit storm of a thread. Wtf are you serious, in the scam accusations board??? Get over it if he hurt your feelings, this is not what the tag is for.

Or at least the "I have zero knowledge of business law, contracts, formal agreements, basic definitions of simple words, and I'm butthurt because I didn't get want I wanted" tag.

Rarity, welcome to the internet. It seems you're a bit new here. People do stuff like this all the time. It's only if money is stolen from someone else that we actually give a shit here. Other than that, it's just people complaining that they had their feelings hurt.

Anyway, that's the last I'll say on the topic. I can't instill common sense, logic, and basic reasoning to a brick wall, so what's the point lol
legendary
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1004
October 10, 2012, 07:12:21 PM
#82
It sounds like Kurt Cobain playing Mary Had a Little Lamb to me...  Huh

Not sure what the issue is?

-Zoey

I actually dug up Cobain's corpse yesterday and repeatedly beat him over the head with a guitar using the amp (with way too much clipping) as an anvil while singing Mary Had A Little Lamb. It sounded exactly like this.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
Look upon me, BitcoinTalk, for I...am...Rarity!
October 10, 2012, 07:06:09 PM
#81
Its a life lesson for your niece, the world is filled with liars and cheats, tell her to get used to it.

Right, go post that in the Nefario thread.
full member
Activity: 322
Merit: 100
October 10, 2012, 07:03:16 PM
#80
Its a life lesson for your niece, the world is filled with liars and cheats, tell her to get used to it.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
Look upon me, BitcoinTalk, for I...am...Rarity!
October 10, 2012, 07:00:22 PM
#79
The emotional damages to my niece are only one aspect of this case.  In attempting to defraud me into believing he had played the song requested in accordance to our agreement he was attempting to silence a vocal critic of his business.  He had an economic motive in this scam.
full member
Activity: 322
Merit: 100
October 10, 2012, 06:56:39 PM
#78
Rarity should be the one receiving the scammer for starting this shit storm of a thread. Wtf are you serious, in the scam accusations board??? Get over it if he hurt your feelings, this is not what the tag is for.
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
October 10, 2012, 06:55:01 PM
#77
I demand a "dank" tag for everyone posting in this thread.

I actually did have a dank tag at one point. Luckily it could be removed using plastic surgery and I could then fit into my underwear once more.
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
October 10, 2012, 06:52:50 PM
#76
dank's fast becoming the Chris-Chan of Bitcoin.  He'll probably be "famous" by the end of the year, but only because it can't be all that much longer before 4chan becomes aware of his existence.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
Look upon me, BitcoinTalk, for I...am...Rarity!
October 10, 2012, 06:33:07 PM
#75
Quote
...as the written agreement?

No, the written agreement was made over several posts and is quoted in full in the first post of this thread.  Please stop wasting my time.

Quote
As nothing was taken from you, this is not a scam. You're right in saying this is an easy open-shut case. There is no scam.

It's like saying somebody shouldn't be charged with bank robbery if the guard thwarts them.  You are an idiot.  Nothing was taken from me because I identified the scam as it was in progress.

Quote
This is just an opinionated statement and absolutely not possible to prove in under the best of circumstances.

Neither of those statements are opinions.  They are facts.

Quote
"I would like for you to do this for me", and he would say "Why yes, I will do this for you by [specified date]". THAT is the most basic verbal (written in this case) contract you can have.

We had an agreement, and this is all spelled out in writing, that if he played Mary Had A Little Lamb (and was given a tab to show what song I meant) I would agree to perform certain actions.  There is no need for dates or "Why Yes" since it was conditional on Dank making the effort.  I later asked him to post the song in accordance to our agreement, and he claimed he was doing so with the posted song.  This is when the scam occurred, had he simply never claimed to have played it there would be no complaint.  The agreement did not require him to.  The scam is in claiming to have fulfilled the agreement when he did not in an attempt to falsely claim payment.
legendary
Activity: 1064
Merit: 1001
October 10, 2012, 06:29:40 PM
#74
I did not ask for a favor, I had a written agreement as documented in the very first post of this thread.  

Are you referring to...

These are pretty good, though a little derivative of Dank Untitled 64 and Dank Untitled 75 which are my favorites.  While you are recording could you take a moment to record Mary Had A Little Lamb for my niece?  She is heading home tomorrow and I won't see her again until December.

http://www.music-for-music-teachers.com/mary-had-a-little-lamb-guitar.html

...as the written agreement? Unfortunately, that is not what you think it is. You're asking if he could, not if he will. There is a difference, which is why I made the original note that you were asking for a favor, and not formally agreeing to a service. Not only that, but I see absolutely NO mention that Dank agreed to perform the specified tab. I see the quote where he mentioned that if you listened to what he played you'd have to stop posting stuff or whatever, but there's no detail.

Rarity, you HAVE to understand that there needs to be quoted proof of an ACTUAL agreement. This would entail that you say "I would like for you to do this for me", and he would say "Why yes, I will do this for you by [specified date]". THAT is the most basic verbal (written in this case) contract you can have.


I was not "satisfied" because the agreed upon product was not delivered and was falsely represented as genuine in an attempt to get me to comply with our agreement.  This is a scam by the most basic of definitions.
Ah, I see. Well since that's the case, let me enlighten you a bit. The most basic definition of scam is "to defraud; swindle". You also seem to be lacking the basic knowledge of "defraud; swindle" so I look the liberty of looking it up for you:

The monetary gain for Dank in this scam was to silence a vocal critic of his business practices and the monetary value of recorded music is well established.

This is just an opinionated statement and absolutely not possible to prove in under the best of circumstances.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
Look upon me, BitcoinTalk, for I...am...Rarity!
October 10, 2012, 06:22:50 PM
#73
Rarity, that is my version of Mary Had a Little Lamb, just for you.  Perhaps if you didn't spam my threads with the same questions, I would have turned the distortion down and tuned my guitar before recording.

You cannot sell a car and deliver a bike and act as if it is all the same.  The product did not match the tune or rhythm of the provided tab.  It is not a matter of interpretation.  Even properly tuned and undistorted the notes played would not be identifiable as the requested song.

In a false attempt to claim this as the product promised and not the entirely distinct song it was, you have now admitted instead to purposefully providing a low quality unrecognizable product.  Such an intentional action out of spite to provide an unrecognizable product is an admission of scamming.   You may as well have agreed to sell me a hamburger but instead sold a hot dog you spit on.  Clearly not the agreed upon product.

If you are indeed capable of playing Mary Had A Little Lamb in a recognizable manner which as an expert guitar player you surely can, you can provide your defense by recording it and posting it for this thread.  Given your history of fraud, however, you should do it on video and provide us with identification.
legendary
Activity: 1134
Merit: 1002
You cannot kill love
October 10, 2012, 06:08:31 PM
#72
Rarity, that is my version of Mary Had a Little Lamb, just for you.  Perhaps if you didn't spam my threads with the same questions, I would have turned the distortion down and tuned my guitar before recording.
hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
Decent Programmer to boot!
October 10, 2012, 06:00:04 PM
#71
We had a written agreement of barter for the delivery of a recorded musical performance of a specified song.  Recorded music has a well established monetary value.   Delivery was made of a fraudulent, misrepresented product.  

Normally, yes, recorded music does have a monetary value. However, what ever Dank is trying to do with his guitar is not music.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
Look upon me, BitcoinTalk, for I...am...Rarity!
October 10, 2012, 05:44:12 PM
#70
I did not ask for a favor, I had a written agreement as documented in the very first post of this thread.  I was not "satisfied" because the agreed upon product was not delivered and was falsely represented as genuine in an attempt to get me to comply with our agreement.  This is a scam by the most basic of definitions.  

The monetary gain for Dank in this scam was to silence a vocal critic of his business practices and the monetary value of recorded music is well established.
legendary
Activity: 1064
Merit: 1001
October 10, 2012, 05:39:44 PM
#69
Quote
1) Was payment required for services?
2) Is there sufficient evidence of a contract? Verbal or otherwise, though written is preferred (shouldn't be so hard since this is on the internet...)
3) What was your net loss as a result of working with Dank?

Yes, Yes, I called out the scam before my payment was required.  My loss in not getting the recording I promised is vast, the value of an early rare personalized recording from a great musician is vast.

As Dank is offering no explanation, denial, or defense I believe this case remains open and shut.

Part 1)
So let me get this straight. You were going to pay him for the song...but didn't pay him because you didn't get what you wanted (but you did, in fact, receive something)?

I did not receive the product that was promised.  The fact that I did not make payment is irrelevant as the purpose of the tag is to warn people in the future that the tagged breaks their agreements.  The user in question solicits large amounts of money through this forum and can not be trusted to stand by his word.  

Quote
Dank did deliver a recording to you that very very very vaguely resembles a shitty quality "Mary had a little lamb", did he not? You can claiming he's scamming you because the quality didn't match your standards? From what I'm gathering, Rarity, you are the scammer as you haven't paid for services rendered by Dank.

By no standards was this the requested song according to the provided tab.  It was not poor quality, it was a different song.  If you maintain a standard where people can lie entirely about the products they sell on the forum there will be no reason for anyone to ever continue to buy and sell here.  If someone promises to sell an iPhone and instead sends a low quality flip phone they should not receive leniency for simply sending a phone.

Quote
You're view of a "great musician" needs a bit of work my friend. I'm not entirely sure rubbing your testicles on some guitar strings to make sounds qualifies as music...but I suppose who am I to judge.

Dank himself has made the promise of music greatness, if you are telling me he has misrepresented this than it is just more proof he is untrustworthy and has operated a scam.

Quote
Part 4)
I'm not trying to be a dick here, I'm just giving an outside opinion on the matter after reading through this thread. Honestly, it's utterly idiotic. Unless there's a substantial amount of evidence posted I don't think I can vote either way yet. But based on what I've seen already there isn't a scam here.

We have a written agreement for a product to be provided, it was not.  There is nothing to debate.

Rarity, *sigh*, you're really trying to create the thinnest argument possible here. The reality is that you're just butthurt your niece wasn't happy about the twanging Dank submitted.

No one lost any money. No one gained any money. There is no scam here. Based on the evidence you've currently provided in this thread, all you did was ask for a favor. Just because Dank might have been an asshole doesn't mean he's going around scamming people.

People's definition of "Scammer" on this forum is ridiculously construed.
Pages:
Jump to: