Author

Topic: [SCAMMER] Quickseller/ ACCTseller sold me a hacked account (Read 4414 times)

copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
I actually just got into physical coin trading this past month, the industry seems quite similar to Bitcoin trading and it feels like a natural fit. Here's the latest one I got yesterday, sold a quarter pound of these in 2 weeks  Cool I've been selling them at spot price to a local gold dealer, even though they have significant intrinsic value. Perhaps you might be interested for collecting purposes, or selling to your customer base. I simply don't have the expertise or the customers yet so I haven't been trying to sell to collectors for above spot.

I have been looking for someone with expertise in coins and precious metals so I can advance in this industry, I'm doing it simple since I just started but I know I'm nowhere near the potential that exists. Even if you don't want to buy anything I'd love to discuss coin trading with you, feel free to text or call me (# below), or I can send you a messenger ID through PM.

https://i.imgur.com/C64Ie1p.jpg
I am not familiar with those coins, so I would need to pass. I avoid trading in markets that I have not studied and am familiar with. This means that I avoid trying in physical coins that I know have fetched a nice premium in the past.

If the coins are in good condition and they have some numismatic value, then I would suggest getting them graded, most likely be ANACS as getting coins graded is almost universally going to increase it's value.

You might be able to find a market for these coins in the goods section of the marketplace.

I would also like an answer to xetsr's question.   
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1000
I actually just got into physical coin trading this past month, the industry seems quite similar to Bitcoin trading and it feels like a natural fit. Here's the latest one I got yesterday, sold a quarter pound of these in 2 weeks  Cool I've been selling them at spot price to a local gold dealer, even though they have significant intrinsic value. Perhaps you might be interested for collecting purposes, or selling to your customer base. I simply don't have the expertise or the customers yet so I haven't been trying to sell to collectors for above spot.

I have been looking for someone with expertise in coins and precious metals so I can advance in this industry, I'm doing it simple since I just started but I know I'm nowhere near the potential that exists. Even if you don't want to buy anything I'd love to discuss coin trading with you, feel free to text or call me (# below), or I can send you a messenger ID through PM.


Curious to know if those are REAL gold coins and how much you're paying for them to profit selling them for spot. Something seems off...

Sorry for getting off topic here.
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
Yes cloud think purchased several accounts, including the first one that I ever created (bluemangroup) from a reseller, which was very disappointing when I saw it with negative trust. However the purchase of these accounts did not work out very well for them because they were outed an alts of a scammer and their value went to pretty much zero.

This will exaggerate the importance of using escrow on *every* trade and to actually read the comments, the amount risked, and the reputation of the people who left trust with a potential trading partner. If the amounts risked and reputation of received trust is all virtually zero then such trust ratings should probably be ignored. If a large percentage of positive ratings are from people in your trust network then there is a good chance that person is farming trust and should be treated as a scammer. If there are/is scam reports by reputable people (regardless of if they are in your trust network) then you should trade with additional caution.

I think people should overall understand that the short delay in the time it takes to complete a transaction and the small added fee to use escrow is a very small price to pay when compared to the losses associated with getting scammed.
legendary
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1000
We'll start seeing many more attempts to scam using bought accounts. Account values continue to drop as Hero and Legendary accounts become more common, price will continue to drop making it much easier for a scammer to buy, scam, profit and repeat. It's inevitable as newer and even some older members here who don't know better blindly trust those with Hero and Legendary account status or accounts with trust. I'm pretty sure scammers and account sellers have been also farming "trust accounts" as well.

Unfortunately, nothing can be done to stop this. Private keys will be sold with accounts and scammers will try to keep the same posting style making it very hard to tell it's been sold. Banning account sales will stop the more lazy scammers but not the ones that are more determined.

Didn't cloudthink purchase accounts? How is that going right now?
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
What sort of trading do you do on here?

At least in the currency exchange there are lots of fraudsters using purchased accounts, it's widespread rather than isolated. The typical scammer will not cultivate their own accounts, it's too much time and effort and they aren't able to trade legitimately. That's why we see people stealing less than $10 all the time even though it would be much more profitable in the long run to be honest during the small trades and gain rep. The moment a thief gets control of money, no matter how small, they will never return it unless it directly leads to more funds in their control. Even the most patient scammers run away with the money within a month or so, the moment they get a taste of thousand dollar trades their brain short circuits and they steal it.

It's their own downfall. If only they knew how profitable and fulfilling legitimate business can be. Instead they choose the short term gains for a lifetime of guilt, paranoia, and misery.
I originally started trading forum accounts, however I left that business after the market became very saturated and no longer worth it for me. 

I now occasionally trade physical coins however I intend to be able to ultimately collect a number of coins. I do very much enjoy trading on here.

I also act as escrow for a variety of deals however that pretty much results in dust earnings.

My project somewhat was assuming that the price of Bitcoin was going to be a lot higher.

I think a major reason why so many scammers are successful in the currency exchange section is because there is no sticky warning people of the importance of using escrow and as a result people get greedy when they see a really good deal.

I think a lot of the scams are done by the same person and/or the same group of people.
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
Selling accounts would become much less lucrative if they were banned immediately upon discovery and it put you at risk of losing all your other accounts. All we need is a motivated moderator/administrator to take charge of enforcing this. It's guaranteed to weaken the account trade, giving fraudsters less opportunity to change their identity and hurt innocent people.

This is a perfect job for Quickseller actually since you are highly motivated to rid the forum of scammers. You've got some experience in the account trade so you'll know what to look for.
Selling accounts would become a higher risk endeavor, and almost universally speaking, things that involve more risk would mean that the expected reward would be higher.

As I mentioned previously, there are very few instances of fraudsters/scammers using purchased accounts to attempt to scam, and they have incentives not to do so because if they get caught trying to scam then they would loose their initial investment.

Even if scammers were unable to purchase older accounts, there would be nothing that would stop them from cultivating their own accounts which would still enable them to scam, and since the incentive is no longer there to not scam with a high level account, they would have a greater incentive to try to pull off a scam attempt.

It would make the account trading environment more difficult, however in the realm of things it would not be all that hard IMO
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
There is nothing legitimate about making money on selling accounts. The only excuse is if the person was ignorant about what they are used for.

It's not like selling accounts are gonna make a lot of money either, much better for legitimate traders to focus on real businesses. Lots of stupid stuff like this on the internet where people facilitate and/or commit a lot of fraud for little gain.
Out of curiosity, how much money have you made in the currency exchange subform?

There are very few instances where sold accounts have been used to scam, in fact the vast majority of accounts end up in signature deals when the company is advertising based on how "flashy" they can make their signature. An even less percentage of accounts are actually successful in pulling of  a scam attempt so, as mentioned above, the scammer only ends up with a loss because he received nothing from the scam attempt yet had to pay to buy the account.
Hard to say how much I've directly made off Bitcointalk's currency exchange. Easily over $100,000 profit thanks to paypal mycash, moneypaks, vanilla, amazon, etc. with a few big cash deposit and western union/moneygram customers thrown in, and that's just from Bitcointalk customers, local trading is a way bigger part of my business. Bitcointalk definitely stimulated my local trading through helping me gain skills and capability to do large volume.
Considering that your thread is roughly a year old, I don't think that is all that bad (that is quite good actually), although I am sure you had to put a good amount of effort into earning that much money.

When you are in business, you should expect to lose some amount of money due to fraud/scams/ect., that is a normal cost of doing business, as a good risk manager, you should take steps to minimize those losses as much as possible by taking certain precautions.

As mentioned previously, banning the sale of accounts is only going to move the trade of accounts off the site, which would likely make doing business on here more risky and more scam attempts will be likely.
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
There is nothing legitimate about making money on selling accounts. The only excuse is if the person was ignorant about what they are used for.

It's not like selling accounts are gonna make a lot of money either, much better for legitimate traders to focus on real businesses. Lots of stupid stuff like this on the internet where people facilitate and/or commit a lot of fraud for little gain.
Out of curiosity, how much money have you made in the currency exchange subform?

There are very few instances where sold accounts have been used to scam, in fact the vast majority of accounts end up in signature deals when the company is advertising based on how "flashy" they can make their signature. An even less percentage of accounts are actually successful in pulling of  a scam attempt so, as mentioned above, the scammer only ends up with a loss because he received nothing from the scam attempt yet had to pay to buy the account.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
The most benign use of a sold account is getting into a signature campaign you're not qualified for. This defrauds the advertisers, since they end up with an unknowledgable scammer making as much posts as possible, rather than the knowledgeable veteran member they are paying for.

It's not defrauding anyone. They're paying for an advert in a signature and that's what they get.

Think about that again ..... They are paying for an advert in the signature of a person who's gained a good reputation on the forum, suposedly by possitively contributing to the forum.

In your opinion, which just so happens to suit your argument. They're paying for a Hero member account and that's what they're getting. If they wanted to make sure that the account was originally and always owned by that person they should ask for a signed message from a very old address first, but they probably don't care and the only person that seems to care about it is you.

And your opinion does not suit your argument? For cying out out, that is what opinions are! But that you supposedly set the rules on what amounts to be an OK trade (in accounts on the forum) makes you right is no-where near the right thing, and that is NOT just my opinion.

An account that has been bought will surely not be able to carry on in that vein, thus the advertiser has been shortchanged. Scam though and through!

 ..... Nothing has been stolen or swindled. ......

Apart from the advertiser's and the gullible user's trust.


.... but the irony is you're a scammer (tagged as such) hiding behind an account that has no other purpose than to troll now. I wonder how many times your account has changed hands or what other nefarious activities it has been involved in? Who knows?

Me tagged as a scammer, hiding behind an account?  Did I miss something here? Whatever you are smoking, ive up on it.
But like I mentioned before, you have no reason to attack my personality, not even on the back of my comments in this thread. But I know scammers in this forum stick together ..... so there.
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2717
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
The most benign use of a sold account is getting into a signature campaign you're not qualified for. This defrauds the advertisers, since they end up with an unknowledgable scammer making as much posts as possible, rather than the knowledgeable veteran member they are paying for.

It's not defrauding anyone. They're paying for an advert in a signature and that's what they get.

Think about that again ..... They are paying for an advert in the signature of a person who's gained a good reputation on the forum, suposedly by possitively contributing to the forum.

In your opinion, which just so happens to suit your argument. They're paying for a Hero member account and that's what they're getting. If they wanted to make sure that the account was originally and always owned by that person they should ask for a signed message from a very old address first, but they probably don't care and the only person that seems to care about it is you.

An account that has been bought will surely not be able to carry on in that vein, thus the advertiser has been shortchanged. Scam though and through!

Twisted logic, and I don't think you know what the definition of a scam is. Nothing has been stolen or swindled. Maybe if they stated 'account must be owned by original owner' you could argue some terms of service have been broken, but they don't. Still not a scam either way.

And that is quite aside from whatever nefarious acts and / or omissions the account can be used for, and the most prevalent use of such being standing up for fellow scumbags when they get exposed. Honestly, it may be a known evil that scams do (and will continue to) happen, but for a member of staff (tagged as such) to come out and say buying a hero account for the purpose of joining a signature advertising campaign does not amout to a scam is pathetic.

It's not pathetic and it's not a scam, it's logical, especially if you were open to the logic/reasoning/argument behind why their sale is allowed in the first place, but the irony is you're a scammer (tagged as such) hiding behind an account that has no other purpose than to troll now. I wonder how many times your account has changed hands or what other nefarious activities it has been involved in? Who knows?
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
The most benign use of a sold account is getting into a signature campaign you're not qualified for. This defrauds the advertisers, since they end up with an unknowledgable scammer making as much posts as possible, rather than the knowledgeable veteran member they are paying for.

It's not defrauding anyone. They're paying for an advert in a signature and that's what they get.

Think about that again ..... They are paying for an advert in the signature of a person who's gained a good reputation on the forum, suposedly by possitively contributing to the forum. An account that has been bought will surely not be able to carry on in that vein, thus the advertiser has been shortchanged. Scam though and through!

And that is quite aside from whatever nefarious acts and / or omissions the account can be used for, and the most prevalent use of such being standing up for fellow scumbags when they get exposed. Honestly, it may be a known evil that scams do (and will continue to) happen, but for a member of staff (tagged as such) to come out and say buying a hero account for the purpose of joining a signature advertising campaign does not amout to a scam is pathetic.
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2717
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
Account selling needs to be banned period, for both Bitcointalk and external accounts like facebook, twitter, etc. Selling accounts facilitates fraud by giving someone trust and veteran status without earning it, so a scammer who should have extreme negative rep ends up with a nice looking profile. This fools people into sending first to them when trading if they don't know any better.

So if we banned account sales you would then feel more confident in sending money to scammers? This is exactly one of the reasons why it's allowed as if it was banned it wouldn't change anything apart from give users a false sense of security. People would just sell accounts off site and out of sight.

I've personally dealt with at least a couple people who clearly bought an account to scam traders, common signs are no posts in months and demanding you send first, turning down all other options like escrow even if their trust from months ago indicates they were a reasonable trader.

If it's easy to tell which accounts were sold then it shouldn't be a big issue. People need to make their own minds up about users and 9/10 should be using escrow anyway. Accounts can always be hacked so you should be aware of that too.

Trust can also be directly manipulated via using accounts you bought to give trust to other accounts you own.

You could just create your own army of alts for this, no need to buy one. Should we ban alts now?

Scammers want a fast track to getting people to send first since they'd never build up legit rep on their own, which is why they spend 1+ BTC for accounts. They know they can spend 1 BTC and maybe get 10 BTC from scams.

I think you're exaggerating here. I'm not denying that sometimes people do buy them in an attempt to scam but but most are busted before they even get a chance to. I haven't seen a bought account scam anywhere near that amount and usually they end up trying to scam and getting neg-bombed before they have the chance forever ruining their account and wasting their money in in the process.

Also scammers will use their accounts to damage a legitimate traders reputation in an attempt to take their customers. Segvec did that to me.

How do you know they were bought? He could just have used his own alts or urged or paid others to leave negative.

Regarding external accounts like facebook, these also help scammers gain fake rep, by making a fake identity look like an actual person. Once I tried auctioning gold in the marketplace, and the biggest offer was from a senior member with some positive rep. They talked to me via facebook, the facebook was the hottest british girl ever which is a tactic to distract. It actually fooled me and seemed legit, until the person refused localbitcoins escrow and forum escrow for irrational reasons, demanding we use escrow.com which they would fund with a wire transfer even though the auction was clearly for bitcoins. Ends up they could fund with a credit card, and easily reverse payment out of escrow regardless.

Sounds like it doesn't take much to fool you. Being a "woman" should set off red flags instantly.

Clearly both the bitcointalk and facebook accounts were bought, and it almost lost me thousands of dollars, and ruined the auction. A few days later someone got scammed by the same person for a lot of money.

How were they clearly bought? Anyone could create both a bitcointalk account and Facebook account pretending to be a girl free of charge. If people are naive enough to send money just because they're a woman then there's not much anyone can do for them nor is it the staff's job to babysit them.

Bitcointalk is somewhat grey area since it allows a relatively free market, but clearly Bitcointalk doesn't support criminals, so why should fraudsters be able to openly trade accounts? The trading of accounts needs to be banned ASAP, and any indications you bought or sold an account should lead to all associated accounts being terminated. The marketplaces on Bitcointalk would be safer and probably a lot more active if there was a crackdown on all sold accounts, almost all sold accounts are used by scammers.

For the same reason scams and scammers aren't moderated: Almost impossible to police and incredibly time consuming for staff to check for these things, not to mention we can get it wrong. What if we accidentally thought you were the scammer and banned you? Fair game? Nope. It's easier to allow them and let users police and defend themselves as they should be able to do. As much as you dislike the practice banning accounts sales will do absolutely nothing but push them off site.

The most benign use of a sold account is getting into a signature campaign you're not qualified for. This defrauds the advertisers, since they end up with an unknowledgable scammer making as much posts as possible, rather than the knowledgeable veteran member they are paying for.

It's not defrauding anyone. They're paying for an advert in a signature and that's what they get.

I'm not calling out anyone in particular, I understand that even honest people could end up selling accounts for profit since they don't realize that the accounts are used maliciously and end up damaging honest traders. This is why new policies need to be enforced to educate thm.

Then why punish everybody including legit people who are just trying to make some extra money from accounts, especially when we can't even enforce it adequately?

To some up, it's time to remove this cancer from Bitcointalk, no more account trading and banning all accounts which appear to be sold. Bitcointalk's currency exchange and market places are very weak right now due to scammers outnumbering honest traders. Almost every newbie gets scammed and most end up avoiding Bitcointalk. Legitimate and reputable traders are constantly being attacked by scammers from all angles, which has ruined even the most successful traders. LouReed is an example, I think he was quite honest but ended up losing so much money to moneypak/paypal/cash deposit scammers he became insolvent, I recall him telling me about losing thousands of dollars numerous times in like a month or 2. There are barely any legitimate traders left. Every time I bump my selling thread I get at least a few inquiries from people who are probably trying to scam me, it's a waste of time so I rarely advertise on Bitcointalk anymore.

I think you're exaggerating the numbers again, but people really need to learn to protect themselves better as harsh as it may sound. The only person who can protect you from being scammed is yourself and sadly sometimes it takes getting burned once or twice before they learn, but most people can handle themselves and if not they certainly need to learn because one thing I know is scammers will never go away and will always be looking for new ways to outsmart you and steal your money. Your solution and logic for this is like trying to put a bandage over a cancer. We can't see it so the cancer is now gone and cured? No, it's still there, just out of sight.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
  • Do you have any evidence that Quicksilver and ACCTseller are the same person?

These scam artists linger on this forum, tend to back each other up and always apply diversionary tactics!  The scam accusation clearly states Quickseller NO Quicksilver ...... Who'd have thought, dogie's number one wingman quite aside from trading in forum accounts (which is a scam of its own right), also scams his customers! You couldn't make it up if you tried.
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
A signed message is solid evidence that an account was owned as of the date the address was posted. It proves that he at one point owned the account, which is undisputed. If you were to sell your account then you would still be able to produce a signed message from any addresses previously associated with your account.

I don't know how many bitcoin addresses you have, however I counted over 130 used addresses in my electrum wallet whose seed was generated only >3 months ago (and which wallet is not the only one I use). If he were to do a google search then he would have needed to know which address to search for.

I remember checking his post history and was unable to find a posted address. If his address or pgp key was more visible then he would be risking being asked for a signed message which would have foiled his plan to scam. He needed an address that could easily be linked back to his account, but only to someone who knows where to look, or to someone who is shown very specific evidence.

I admit that when I purchased the zedicus account, I was very new and that it was a mistake to not get a signed message prior to paying for it, however that does not mean that the account was hacked. The generally accepted standard to prove ownership of an account is to provide a signed message that specifies that the ownership is transferring, then if/when someone comes around to claim the account was hacked, that signed message can be presented to disprove such allegation.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
Since Badbear wont elaborate as usual, it really isn't very helpful and doesn't tell us much. Usually signing a message previously used on an account is considered fairly solid evidence of ownership. I don't find it that odd that he used a cached address, he probably used Google, making it quite a simple task to search for.  As far as the emails, I could see some one not checking their inbox for an extended period of time. If his intent was to scam then why wouldn't he prepare a more visible Bitcoin address in a post or set up a pgp key prior, instead of fishing around for deleted posts?

None of this sounds unrealistic to me. Obviously this situation creates issues with telling which accounts are or are not stolen in the future. If it is just one person's word against another's, then what is to stop account sellers from regularly selling stolen accounts and just claiming anyone who complains is just trying to scam? Conversely what is stopping account sellers from scamming? IMO there should be some kind of standard set for this type of situation otherwise this will be a recurring issue, especially after the forum hack.
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
The account was not hacked, as BadBear confirmed here:

Only he doesn't confirm it wasn't hacked. He explicitly said he doesn't know either way.
He says there is good reason to believe that he shouldn't be the owner of the account anymore. Although yes, he does say that he doesn't know with certainty either way, the preponderance of the evidence does support it not being hacked.
I think most people would consider this conclusive evidence:

Well I can confirm that the signed message I received via PM comes from the address he's listed in the cached version of his post. Hence, I can say with almost full confidence that bayuo is in fact the real owner.

@bayuo: I would advise you send theymos a PM with all the information he's requested as stated here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/recovering-hacked-accounts-or-accounts-with-lost-passwords-497545

Please do so in a single PM. If he doesn't respond in a couple of days - send it once more, he does occasionally miss some PMs. I've already PM'ed Stunna so hopefully the hacker won't get any profit from this venture.
Nope. All that confirms is that he was able to produce a signed message from an address previously associated with his account. Additionally, Light mentions that the signed message is from a cashed version of a thread, which implies that the post that included the address was deleted. I was in communication with him for over 3 days before the account was actually purchased, the bayuo account was created very shortly after the account was sold, so if the account was in fact hacked then the hacker would have needed to gain access to the actual password of the account, not change the password, both send and receive PM's to me without the "real" owner of the account noticing, and then bayuo would just so happen to know which thread an address was posted on despite not being able to search for such address because the post was deleted. Also the "real" owner of the account would have had to not noticed PM notification emails received any time I had sent the account a PM.

Can I ask if you seriously think all this would be plausible? It should also be noted that bayuo claims to employ extensive security measures and claims to have used a very long/complex password. It should also be noted that there was no corresponding report of theft of bitcoin from bayuo and he never reported that he found any malware.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
The account was not hacked, as BadBear confirmed here:

Only he doesn't confirm it wasn't hacked. He explicitly said he doesn't know either way.

I think most people would consider this conclusive evidence:

Well I can confirm that the signed message I received via PM comes from the address he's listed in the cached version of his post. Hence, I can say with almost full confidence that bayuo is in fact the real owner.

@bayuo: I would advise you send theymos a PM with all the information he's requested as stated here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/recovering-hacked-accounts-or-accounts-with-lost-passwords-497545

Please do so in a single PM. If he doesn't respond in a couple of days - send it once more, he does occasionally miss some PMs. I've already PM'ed Stunna so hopefully the hacker won't get any profit from this venture.
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
If the account was in fact hacked, then Quickseller, knowingly or otherwise sold stolen property. If he never had legal ownership of it to begin with, he has no right to keep the collected funds because there was no valid exchange. The rest of the argument is irrelevant.

Just a quick analogy for you for comparison...
http://nccriminallaw.sog.unc.edu/must-a-pawn-shop-return-stolen-property-to-its-owner/

He may or may not have known it was hacked, but as far as possession and the law are concerned it doesn't make any difference, he must return the property and the funds, and be more selective about accounts he buys in the future.
The account was not hacked, as BadBear confirmed here:

This is a perfect example of why I don't want to restore accounts (for the most part).  While bayuo obviously did control the Zedicus account at one point, and is probably the original owner, there appears to be a pretty good reason he doesn't anymore (I won't elaborate for privacy reasons). Though there really is no way to be positive either way.

Exemplifies perfectly what I was saying the other day about signing addresses not being conclusive proof that the person signing *should* be in control of that account. 

-snip-

Bayuo sold me the account, received money for it and then later claimed it was hacked so he would receive his account back and obviously get to keep the money he received from the sale. Just a pathetic scam attempt.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
If the account was in fact hacked, then Quickseller, knowingly or otherwise sold stolen property. If he never had legal ownership of it to begin with, he has no right to keep the collected funds because there was no valid exchange. The rest of the argument is irrelevant.

Just a quick analogy for you for comparison...
http://nccriminallaw.sog.unc.edu/must-a-pawn-shop-return-stolen-property-to-its-owner/

He may or may not have known it was hacked, but as far as possession and the law are concerned it doesn't make any difference, he must return the property and the funds, and be more selective about accounts he buys in the future.
newbie
Activity: 39
Merit: 0
@marcotheminer,
If he would have applied for the bit-x campaign, he would have been selected in it?

Had I known for certain it was a hacked account? No.
-snip-
It is not certain that this is a hacked account. No new information has come out about the sale of this account. The other thread in meta got a lot more attention then this thread has gotten

What I meant was: "If I know for certain it was a hacked account..."



Quickseller knew the account was hacked!

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11674128
legendary
Activity: 2072
Merit: 1049
┴puoʎǝq ʞool┴
@marcotheminer,
If he would have applied for the bit-x campaign, he would have been selected in it?

Had I known for certain it was a hacked account? No.
-snip-
It is not certain that this is a hacked account. No new information has come out about the sale of this account. The other thread in meta got a lot more attention then this thread has gotten

What I meant was: "If I know for certain it was a hacked account..."
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
@marcotheminer,
If he would have applied for the bit-x campaign, he would have been selected in it?

Had I known for certain it was a hacked account? No.
-snip-
It is not certain that this is a hacked account. No new information has come out about the sale of this account. The other thread in meta got a lot more attention then this thread has gotten
legendary
Activity: 2072
Merit: 1049
┴puoʎǝq ʞool┴
@marcotheminer,
If he would have applied for the bit-x campaign, he would have been selected in it?

Had I known for certain it was a hacked account? No.

As it was a week ago (as I wasn't aware like other managers wouldn't have been)? Yes.

But now? Probably not.
legendary
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1000
!!! RiSe aBovE ThE StoRm !!!
Quickseller, publicly deny that you do not own ACCTseller and I will rebut your text vomit.
I am sorry sir, but you need to prove your claims, it is not up to me to prove my innocence.

Also please be aware that Quickseller is an account seller so he controls A LOT of accounts. There is probably a lot of shills already in this thread.
You are correct. I do own a lot of accounts but none of them (none that I have for sale) have posed here. Also there are only 9 accounts besides you and me that have posted here, even if they were all my shills, that is hardly a lot. Plus the majority of the accounts that have posted have been neutral to the situation.

EDIT: I also don't need to use shills because my argument is valid and logical.

There does seem to be a bit of signature spam however they are not taking sides

Lolz, was that for me? You meant to say that I am spamming here and I ain't taking any sides? Seriously? It's not like that... You are offering some bounty to prove that zedicus used to scam you, but remember, if you are trustworthy and most importantly, if you are telling the truth, I will do it for free for you as like everyone here, me too wants to know the truth and we know that none of you both will give your credentials to anyone to prove who's correct and who's not... I bet if you both, Quickseller and zedicus, give your credentials to hilariousandco as he's the staff member here and if he takes the responsibility to reveal the truth out here, then it may sort out the things going on here... Do you both agree with the same, and will you (hilariousandco) please look into the matter personally this time and sort this out, Sir?
legendary
Activity: 1064
Merit: 1000
Quickseller should show a screenshot of the PM in which you can see the payment address for the account. Zedicus too.

After Zedicus signs this address to prove that he is the real buyer.

I agree. That is a good way to sort this out. If quick seller can post screenshots or ask a trusted member (I'm thinking vod) to log in to his account to verify that he did indeed bought the zedicus account from the original owner.
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
Quickseller, publicly deny that you do not own ACCTseller and I will rebut your text vomit.
I am sorry sir, but you need to prove your claims, it is not up to me to prove my innocence.

Also please be aware that Quickseller is an account seller so he controls A LOT of accounts. There is probably a lot of shills already in this thread.
You are correct. I do own a lot of accounts but none of them (none that I have for sale) have posed here. Also there are only 9 accounts besides you and me that have posted here, even if they were all my shills, that is hardly a lot. Plus the majority of the accounts that have posted have been neutral to the situation.

EDIT: I also don't need to use shills because my argument is valid and logical.

There does seem to be a bit of signature spam however they are not taking sides
legendary
Activity: 966
Merit: 1004
CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!
Quickseller, publicly deny that you do not own ACCTseller and I will rebut your text vomit.


Also please be aware that Quickseller is an account seller so he controls A LOT of accounts. There is probably a lot of shills already in this thread.
legendary
Activity: 966
Merit: 1004
CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!
Quickseller, I do not have time for your games. To the ACTUAL POINT of this thread.

Did you sell me an account that you knew was being disputed by the owner (or someone who had control over this account in the past)? YES

Didn't this only come to light after it was sold? And this is the problem with buying and selling accounts which both buyers and sellers should be aware of the risks involved. And as Marco said the account isn't ruined because it doesn't have defaulttrust feedback (though the longer you drag this out the more likely it is to recieve some especially since you're now issuing threats).

No, it was ongoing before I purchased this account.
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
@Quickseller,
What evidence are you talking about? I've been watching that thread very carefully and I didn't find any, link me through quoting the same...
If you are looking for evidence that zedicus was not hacked, then I presented it in this post
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
I am confident enough that zedicus was planning on trying to scam when he purchased the account that I am willing to offer a bounty of .02 for anyone who can show a PM from zedicus regarding doing business that was received between 16 Aug 2014 and 8 Sep 2014. In order to prove the PM is real, you must either report it and a moderator can confirm it or an escrow can access your account (who we both trust) and can post what was received from zedicus. I will keep this offer open until 11 dec 2014 at 11:59 UDT.
legendary
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1000
!!! RiSe aBovE ThE StoRm !!!
@Quickseller,
What evidence are you talking about? I've been watching that thread very carefully and I didn't find any, link me through quoting the same...
sr. member
Activity: 700
Merit: 250
Vave.com - Crypto Casino
You wont win. Quickseller/ACCTseller is likely backed by the legendary member Eisenhower34 who is on default trust.

Incorrect. There are special features regarding my hero that others do not have, for example my hero is on default trust and is highly respected within the community
Is there any evidence for this allegation?
If true, it makes a mockery of the entire default list.
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
Quickseller, I do not have time for your games. To the ACTUAL POINT of this thread.
I don't think it is too much to ask that you prove what you are claiming. In both criminal and civil litigation the burden is on the person bringing the claim (in this case you) to prove their case. 
Did you sell me an account that you knew was being disputed by the owner (or someone who had control over this account in the past)? YES
No, I deny this. There was a dispute over the ownership of the zedicus account at one point, however it was resolved on 16 Aug, 2014 at 2:59 PM UDT. There was no additional evidence presented by bayuo after this time. See the below quote:
This is a perfect example of why I don't want to restore accounts (for the most part).  While bayuo obviously did control the Zedicus account at one point, and is probably the original owner, there appears to be a pretty good reason he doesn't anymore (I won't elaborate for privacy reasons). Though there really is no way to be positive either way.

Exemplifies perfectly what I was saying the other day about signing addresses not being conclusive proof that the person signing *should* be in control of that account. 

Can we get any conformation from staff if they check ip logs in case of hacked accounts.

Yes, but it isn't conclusive proof anymore than signing an address is, just a piece of evidence. 

(bold done by me). Unless you can prove that you purchased the account from me prior to this time then you have no case. Even if you can prove you purchased the account before this time any harm that you had suffered was reversed when the dispute was resolved.
Would a reasonable person in my position still purchase an account with this extra information that you purposefully withheld? NO
The fact that a reasonable person may or may not want to purchase the account is irrelevant. In order to withhold information, such information needs to be first requested. I deny that you requested any information about a dispute of account ownership. You have provided no such proof and appear unwilling to provide such proof. 
If you do not want to make this right, you need a scam tag. People need to know that you have dishonest business practices.
You are entitled to your own opinion. There is nothing to make right.
I think it is pretty fucken obvious that I own this account (since I am posting from it), so stop with the games and give me a REFUND!
The whole basis of your claim is that you are saying the zedicus account was hacked and stolen from the original owner. If you are saying that the fact you are able to post from your account proves ownership then you invalidate your claim the ownership of the account even could be under dispute.

I have not been able to get it in a signature campaign since (the intended use). Therefore, I cannot make my investment back.

You still can. All negatives you've received are untrusted so all signature campaigns are still going to accept you.

So this isn't a valid arguement.
Right. Plus even if you have default negative trust you can participate in bit mixer and Bitcoin Scratchticket.

Also you have claimed that you have tried to join signature campaigns via PM, but have provided no proof of such.

Additionally according to this post another account ( Pierre11) whose ownership is much more questionable received payment from the GAW campaign. Here is the scam accusation claiming the account was stolen. At one point it is even admitted that the account was given to the incorrect person.
@marcotheminer,
If he would have applied for the bit-x campaign, he would have been selected in it?

Also, as Bayuo has proved that the account "zedicus" belongs to him only, will Quickseller give him the funds he received for hacking his account, i.e., BTC1.1 (as shown in the evidences above), or does "zedicus" guarantee that if he gets a refund from Quickseller, will he then transfer the ownership of this account back to Bayuo?

Reference: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/account-hacked-help-plz-741302
This is libel. bayuo has not proved that he is the current owner, nor has it been proven that I hacked the account. I have provided evidence to the contrary.
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2717
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
Quickseller, I do not have time for your games. To the ACTUAL POINT of this thread.

Did you sell me an account that you knew was being disputed by the owner (or someone who had control over this account in the past)? YES

Didn't this only come to light after it was sold? And this is the problem with buying and selling accounts which both buyers and sellers should be aware of the risks involved. And as Marco said the account isn't ruined because it doesn't have defaulttrust feedback (though the longer you drag this out the more likely it is to recieve some especially since you're now issuing threats).
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 500
Quickseller should show a screenshot of the PM in which you can see the payment address for the account. Zedicus too.

After Zedicus signs this address to prove that he is the real buyer.
legendary
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1000
!!! RiSe aBovE ThE StoRm !!!
@marcotheminer,
If he would have applied for the bit-x campaign, he would have been selected in it?

Also, as Bayuo has proved that the account "zedicus" belongs to him only, will Quickseller give him the funds he received for hacking his account, i.e., BTC1.1 (as shown in the evidences above), or does "zedicus" guarantee that if he gets a refund from Quickseller, will he then transfer the ownership of this account back to Bayuo?

Reference: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/account-hacked-help-plz-741302
legendary
Activity: 2072
Merit: 1049
┴puoʎǝq ʞool┴
I have not been able to get it in a signature campaign since (the intended use). Therefore, I cannot make my investment back.

You still can. All negatives you've received are untrusted so all signature campaigns are still going to accept you.

So this isn't a valid arguement.

That's a pretty broad generalization; different signature campaign managers look for different things in their participants, but I wouldn't be surprised if most would be weary of accepting someone with what is potentially a stolen account - I know I would be, and would likely rather not have anything to do with it, in order to avoid it reflecting negatively on my campaign.

EDIT: but give it a try zedicus - LuckyBit is currently open. Smiley

I can tell you right now that luckybit and gawminers would accept him. So would a few others.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
Wait I am confused, do you mean Quickseller or Quicksilver?
legendary
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1071
I have not been able to get it in a signature campaign since (the intended use). Therefore, I cannot make my investment back.

You still can. All negatives you've received are untrusted so all signature campaigns are still going to accept you.

So this isn't a valid arguement.

That's a pretty broad generalization; different signature campaign managers look for different things in their participants, but I wouldn't be surprised if most would be weary of accepting someone with what is potentially a stolen account - I know I would be, and would likely rather not have anything to do with it, in order to avoid it reflecting negatively on my campaign.

EDIT: but give it a try zedicus - LuckyBit is currently open. Smiley
legendary
Activity: 2072
Merit: 1049
┴puoʎǝq ʞool┴
I have not been able to get it in a signature campaign since (the intended use). Therefore, I cannot make my investment back.

You still can. All negatives you've received are untrusted so all signature campaigns are still going to accept you.

So this isn't a valid arguement.
hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
sucker got hacked and screwed --Toad
This is how I read Quickseller's responses:

Do you have a cat?

Can you show me proof of this cat?

Is the cat brown and orange?

Do you like cats?

Can you provide proof that you like cats?

Do you like cats more than dogs?

Do cats live longer than horses?

Have you ever seen a cat ride a horse?

If so, prove it?

TLDR - Stop asking stupid questions. I thought this topic was very clear. You were dishonest
(FRAUD) and now I want my money back. Your whole business revolves around honesty, why let this spill out? You're only ruining yourself with your relentless text vomit.
If I had the money to spare I'd pay you for that. I had to choice but to LOL when I read this...

legendary
Activity: 966
Merit: 1004
CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!
This is how I read Quickseller's responses:

Do you have a cat?

Can you show me proof of this cat?

Is the cat brown and orange?

Do you like cats?

Can you provide proof that you like cats?

Do you like cats more than dogs?

Do cats live longer than horses?

Have you ever seen a cat ride a horse?

If so, prove it?

TLDR - Stop asking stupid questions. I thought this topic was very clear. You were dishonest
(FRAUD) and now I want my money back. Your whole business revolves around honesty, why let this spill out? You're only ruining yourself with your relentless text vomit.
legendary
Activity: 966
Merit: 1004
CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!
Quickseller, I do not have time for your games. To the ACTUAL POINT of this thread.

Did you sell me an account that you knew was being disputed by the owner (or someone who had control over this account in the past)? YES

Would a reasonable person in my position still purchase an account with this extra information that you purposefully withheld? NO

If you do not want to make this right, you need a scam tag. People need to know that you have dishonest business practices.

I think it is pretty fucken obvious that I own this account (since I am posting from it), so stop with the games and give me a REFUND!

copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
Also please address my blackmail/extortion claims against you.

Do you deny that the messages I published are accurate? Do you deny the messages I published would be classified as blackmail/extortion? If so then please make an argument.

If you admit to blackmailing me then what incentive would I have to act honestly with you (if one were to hypothetically assume that I did in fact owe you money)?
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
Can you prove the account was actually purchased by you?
Do you have proof of payment?

Yes. Everything is in PM's from our purchase including the payment address.
Please provide proof in public. If you want to make a claim then the burden is on you to prove your case, not on me to prove my innocence. Have you ever hear of innocent until proven guilty?
Do you have any evidence that Quicksilver and ACCTseller are the same person?

Before I answer this. Do you publicly deny that ACCTseller is not your alternate account? If you don't deny this, why did you need to ask this question?
See my above comment. If you cannot prove a claim then you should not make such claim. I do not need to deny anything, it is on you to prove what you say is true.
What specific term of our agreement was breached as a result of your discovery of this thread (the thread referenced in your OP)?

That whole thread is about Zedicus being a HACKED account. You assured me that this was not the case before purchase. Why do I want to give you money for YOUR baggage? I didn't want to be involved in this. IF I had known these details before purchase, I would have (like any other reasonable person) turned down the offer.
Where is the proof that zedicus is a hacked account? Both theymos and BadBear have said (on reddit and the "bayuo" thread that there is not evidence of such to support giving the account back to bayuo. They have more information that anyone else on here has. The only proof that I have seen is something that would indicate that the account was previously owned by bayuo.

As a result of freedom of speech, anyone is able to make any claim they wish, despite the lack of truth to such claim

Do you have any proof that you have actually applied to join a signature campaign?
Why did not not publicly attempt to join a signature campaign as the rules of most/all signature campaigns state that you must do?


Yes. Because I have pm'd the operators before applying to see whether this tainted account can or cannot be used in signature campaigns.
Provide such proof.
Why would it be appropriate for me to "take" the account back?
Simple. You lied to me to get a sale. You did not tell me this account was under dispute with the original owner. No one would have purchased this account if they had known. Should I make a poll about this?
Did you specifically inquire about a dispute of ownership? If so then what was my response? Please provide proof.

If you did not make such inquiry then what statement did I make that was a lie? Please provide proof.

You cannot rely on hypothetical situations to support a claim.

Why have you not taken my advice as to how to sell an account and attempt to do so?

Because at the end of the day, I couldn't bring myself to sell this account. Who would want it?
Why did you ask for help selling it only days ago? What changed between then and now that caused you to not want to sell the account?

Someone who is wanting to earn money by posting in a signature campaign who is interested in Bitcoin would want the account.

Can you provide any examples of an (alleged or not) scammer has been banned?
Which specific forum rule are you accusing me of breaking that would cause me to deserve a ban?

The same rule that applies if I sell iPhone 6's in the marketplace and ship poo instead.
A search for "poo" in the market place rules and guidelines comes up with no results. A similar search in the Unoffical list of official forum rules thread shows several results discussing pools, but nothing regarding "poo"

Please provide a link that proves I broke a forum rule (if one were to assume your allegations are true).
At which point was current ownership proven in the "bayuo" thread?


The part where he signs a message. Instead of asking stupid questions, go and read the thread.
At which point was current
ownership proven? A signed message does not proof current ownership, it only proves previous ownership. If ownership was proven then how/why are you still in possession of the account?
legendary
Activity: 966
Merit: 1004
CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!
Thank you.

I simply want my money back. Any reasonable person in the same position would not have purchased this account if they knew it was under dispute by the original owner. Plain and simple. Yet Quickseller/ ACCTseller continues to spew defensive crap.

I gave him months to make things right by me. He was just hoping that it would all go away. My hand was forced.
legendary
Activity: 966
Merit: 1004
CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!
Can you prove the account was actually purchased by you?
Do you have proof of payment?

Yes. Everything is in PM's from our purchase including the payment address.

Do you have any evidence that Quicksilver and ACCTseller are the same person?

Before I answer this. Do you publicly deny that ACCTseller is not your alternate account? If you don't deny this, why did you need to ask this question?

What specific term of our agreement was breached as a result of your discovery of this thread (the thread referenced in your OP)?

That whole thread is about Zedicus being a HACKED account. You assured me that this was not the case before purchase. Why do I want to give you money for YOUR baggage? I didn't want to be involved in this. IF I had known these details before purchase, I would have (like any other reasonable person) turned down the offer.


Do you have any proof that you have actually applied to join a signature campaign?
Why did not not publicly attempt to join a signature campaign as the rules of most/all signature campaigns state that you must do?


Yes. Because I have pm'd the operators before applying to see whether this tainted account can or cannot be used in signature campaigns.


Why would it be appropriate for me to "take" the account back?

Simple. You lied to me to get a sale. You did not tell me this account was under dispute with the original owner. No one would have purchased this account if they had known. Should I make a poll about this?


Why have you not taken my advice as to how to sell an account and attempt to do so?

Because at the end of the day, I couldn't bring myself to sell this account. Who would want it?


Can you provide any examples of an (alleged or not) scammer has been banned?
Which specific forum rule are you accusing me of breaking that would cause me to deserve a ban?

The same rule that applies if I sell iPhone 6's in the marketplace and ship poo instead.


At which point was current ownership proven in the "bayuo" thread?


The part where he signs a message. Instead of asking stupid questions, go and read the thread.

hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
no longer selling accounts
Seen that coming from 5 miles away.
What exactly did you "see coming"?

Does the OP want to offer any proof of his claims? The burden of proof is on the accuser. I can say that the majority of his claims are not true.

Account is hacked.
That alone is enough proof.
Right......"hacked"
This is a perfect example of why I don't want to restore accounts (for the most part).  While bayuo obviously did control the Zedicus account at one point, and is probably the original owner, there appears to be a pretty good reason he doesn't anymore (I won't elaborate for privacy reasons). Though there really is no way to be positive either way.

Exemplifies perfectly what I was saying the other day about signing addresses not being conclusive proof that the person signing *should* be in control of that account. 

Can we get any conformation from staff if they check ip logs in case of hacked accounts.

Yes, but it isn't conclusive proof anymore than signing an address is, just a piece of evidence. 

copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
The below quote is from the "bayuo" thread. I have bolded the relevant part when zedicus publicly threatens to expose my accounts for sale:
Quicksellers is no longer responding. I really don't care who is right between bayuo or quicksellers, all I know is that I want my money back. I don't want to be involved in this.

What would be the proper process? Start a scam accusation thread? I know quicksellers has a few accounts so I will list them all for us to zap with negative rep.


This are the two PM's that I received with him claiming to be close to purchasing a default trust account with the intention of giving me negative trust.
You should remove the trust that you have left me.

All of the terms of any trade that we have done was met Can you provide evidence that I made a claim, representation, or agreed to a term that was not met? The result of free speech allows for anyone to make any invalid claim that they want and that is no reason to doubt any actual ownership of the account.

Zedicus is still able to be used in the way that it was marketed - for signature campaigns; if you were planning on using your account for some kind of scam and can no longer do so because it is a known sold account then shame on you for trying to scam. I am sad to say that I am fairly sure that it was the latter as you did not even attempt to claim payment on the prime dice signature campaign when you were eligible and have made no effort to participate in other signature campaigns since the PD campaign closed.

It has also been said my multiple administrators that evidence is not sufficient to substantiate the disputed ownership claim by bayuo, and that no action will be taken to revoke your ownership.

If you want to have any respect in the community and want to maintain your integrity then you should remove your trust. When you made the mistake of admitting to your account being a purchased account, I stuck up for you and made an argument to get the negative trust removed, which maintained the value of your account.

Actually I have tried getting on campaigns. Don't accuse me of scamming when you sold me an account which was tainted. YOU posted in that thread before I even purchased this account admitting it had been sold. Why don't you understand this.

If you will not refund me my BTC, will you help sell the account?

FYI I control multiple accounts with ad campaigns. I don't post personally but I take a cut from the income since I own the account.
PS. I've almost got hold of a trusted account which I plan to hit you with as well.
Additionally I find it suspicious (and likely untrue) that he "owns" multiple accounts that participate in signature campaigns, but he does not actually post. If it is true, then he is probably the cause of a lot of spam.

This is when he threatened my business by saying that my business is "over"
That is because the payment was crypto dust. It is called personal messages, you know, what we are doing right now. I have been personal messaging campaign owners on whether they will accept this account or not.

You sell me a tainted account (which you don't want back) and then accuse me of being a scammer? Have you ever heard of consumer law? This account was not fit for sale. There was an ongoing dispute and you still decided to sell it. So DO NOT try and turn this around. I will bury you. I will make scam accusation thread about you and let the moderators decide.

Your shady account selling business is over.


Here is another example of when he threatened all of my accounts and my business:
YOU admitted the account was sold when he revealed YOUR message.

I'm making a scam accusation thread and labelling ALL of your accounts for negative rep.

Last chance before I destroy your business. Choose your next reply carefully.  Consumer law, read about it.

No more fucking around. Take responsibility.


Another threat:
I'm only giving you so many warnings out of respect for all of the hard work you have put into becoming reputable on this forum. What I reveal to people will destroy your business as hacked accounts are deal breakers.


Here is evidence that I gave him advice as to how to sell his account if that is what he wanted to do so:
I would like a refund. I do not want this tainted account, it is worthless to me. I purchased it on the conditions that it wasn't hacked. I have no idea who is telling the truth but I don't need the hassle.

Please send 1.1 BTC back to 18QYaBURm5Azpq1bC429U4L7fF6sJ4gz8Q

You can organize with the original owner to get BTC from him.
The account was not hacked. I do not issue refunds.

Like I said if you wish to sell the account back to bayuo then you are more then welcome to do so.

Also remember before you accept anything less then what you paid for the account from him that he is trying to get the upper hand above you, but so far has failed and will likely continue to fail. He has PMed many people asking them to give negative rep to the account, he has tried to get the account banned, but all to no avail.

If he really wants the account back as badly as he claims then he will pay you 1.1

You are welcome to sell it to him or anyone else at whatever price you choose (if you choose to sell it to someone else then you should create a "shill" account to sell it). I will not however be a party to the sale.

Bayuo does not want this account. Therefore I am asking you for a refund before I start dishing out negative rep myself.

When someone spends 1.1 BTC for an account, they are not expected to go through this. If you like, you can work with Bayuo to get the 1.1 BTC but it shouldn't be up to me. This is not my problem, you need to take responsibility (which you can expect in this type of business).

So I ask you one more time, please refund me now. This account has zero ROI since it will be kicked off the PD campaign.
Why would it be kicked from the PD campaign? I had PMed stunna when this fiasco started and he said that I would be good to go. You will only get kicked from signature campaigns if you have valid trusted negative trust on your profile (meaning your trust is red). I got tomatocage to remove his negative trust so your profile does not show any red trust.

You also diminished the value of the account when you admitted to it being sold.

If bayuo does not want the account anymore then I would suggest editing your last post to reflect as much and avoid that post in the future. You posting there only attracted attention to yourself.

You were aware that there are no refunds when you purchased the account. My policy on not issuing refunds will stand in this case.

Go to page 3 of the thread and you can clearly see where you admit to this being a sold account. Everyone knew after that and I only posted after I started receiving negative trust.

This is not simply me changing my mind, this is a breach of our terms. You need to refund me my money or I will take this further (on all of your accounts).

So if I message Stunna saying this is a purchased account and it has negative trust, he will still pay me?
i did not post anything on page 3 of the thread bayou created. If you are referring the pm that bayuo quoted then people would generally not take that as fact because anyone can type anything in a quote like that.

Your account does not have any "real" negative trust. Only trust from people on the default trust list really counts either way. The account has similar negative trust when payout was made last month and payment was received without issue.

They made cuts to the campaign that cut most members and the account was not cut due to the posts were of quality nature. In order to continue in the campaign similar quality posts would likely need to continue including posting posts outside the meta section. I would suggest posting more in the bitcoin discussion section and increasing your post length and engaging discussion in threads.

I am not able to take responsibility for other peoples actions nor am I able to pay for other peoples frauds who I did not endorse.

I also have no way of guaranteeing that bayuo did not actually buy the account back from you (knowing how he works he would likely try to buy it back at a discount and I wouldn't be surprised if he would approach me to try to scam me out of more money).

Don't sink as low as that bayuo retard and start playing his games on me. Obviously he didn't pay for the account. As proof, bitcoinben (my account) purchased this from you (or I should say your other 'ACCTseller' account).

Last chance before I start a thread on you. No more mucking around, I want my BTC back.


Here is more proof that I offered to help him sell the account:
You should remove the trust that you have left me.

All of the terms of any trade that we have done was met Can you provide evidence that I made a claim, representation, or agreed to a term that was not met? The result of free speech allows for anyone to make any invalid claim that they want and that is no reason to doubt any actual ownership of the account.

Zedicus is still able to be used in the way that it was marketed - for signature campaigns; if you were planning on using your account for some kind of scam and can no longer do so because it is a known sold account then shame on you for trying to scam. I am sad to say that I am fairly sure that it was the latter as you did not even attempt to claim payment on the prime dice signature campaign when you were eligible and have made no effort to participate in other signature campaigns since the PD campaign closed.

It has also been said my multiple administrators that evidence is not sufficient to substantiate the disputed ownership claim by bayuo, and that no action will be taken to revoke your ownership.

If you want to have any respect in the community and want to maintain your integrity then you should remove your trust. When you made the mistake of admitting to your account being a purchased account, I stuck up for you and made an argument to get the negative trust removed, which maintained the value of your account.

Actually I have tried getting on campaigns. Don't accuse me of scamming when you sold me an account which was tainted. YOU posted in that thread before I even purchased this account admitting it had been sold. Why don't you understand this.

If you will not refund me my BTC, will you help sell the account?

FYI I control multiple accounts with ad campaigns. I don't post personally but I take a cut from the income since I own the account.
You did not even claim payment on the PD signature campaign the first month that you owned the account, not have you tried to sign up for other signature campaigns publicly (and a public post is almost always required). You also have not really posted once you found out that bayuo essentially confirmed your account was purchased.

I will not sell the account under my name, but I have given you advice on how to sell it and can give you advice and guidance as to how you can potentially sell your account.

Please do not give me an empty threat of negative trusting my account. It is not difficult to get someone removed from default trust as it has happened several times in recent months and can easily happen again.

Upon the community's request I am "report" any of the above messages to an administrator who can confirm the authenticity of such PM's. Multiple quoted and discussed the first quoted post in this post.

If I left out any evidence of my above claims then post here and I will see what I can find.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
no longer selling accounts
Seen that coming from 5 miles away.
What exactly did you "see coming"?

Does the OP want to offer any proof of his claims? The burden of proof is on the accuser. I can say that the majority of his claims are not true.
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
  • Can you prove the account was actually purchased by you?
  • Do you have proof of payment?
  • Do you have any evidence that Quicksilver and ACCTseller are the same person?
  • What specific term of our agreement was breached as a result of your discovery of this thread (the thread referenced in your OP)?
  • Do you have any proof that you have actually applied to join a signature campaign?
  • Why did not not publicly attempt to join a signature campaign as the rules of most/all signature campaigns state that you must do?
  • Why would it be appropriate for me to "take" the account back?
  • Why have you not taken my advice as to how to sell an account and attempt to do so?
  • Can you provide any examples of an (alleged or not) scammer has been banned?
  • Which specific forum rule are you accusing me of breaking that would cause me to deserve a ban?
  • At which point was current ownership proven in the "bayuo" thread?


My Counterclaims
  • There was no condition or term of any potential agreement that we have had that I have breached.
  • I told you if you were able to point to a specific representation that turned out to be not true, or any agreement with you that I did not follow through on then I would refund you your money. You have not point to any of such.
  • You recently left me negative trust, after which I sent you a message asking you to remove it, and I was met with a response that essentially was blackmail/extortion.
  • You have previously made an empty threat on the "bayuo" thread saying that you would expose all of my inventory/accounts, which you did not have access to nor did you follow through on
  • You claimed to be close to purchasing an account that is on default trust for the purpose of giving me and my accounts negative trust
  • You have threatened by business (this goes hand and hand with the above blackmail claim)
  • You have not publicly attempted to participate in any signature campaigns, nor did you claim payment the first month you owned the account when it was enrolled in the Prime Dice campaign, which sadly makes me conclude that you purchased the account with the intention of trying to scam someone.
  • An account was recently purchased from me that likely pulled what was probably a "fake scam", which I believe was a failed attempt to make it look like one of my alt accounts was scamming, I speculate you were behind this*

Evidence will follow (*I will not provide evidence on this one for privacy reasons in the event that I am wrong about this)
legendary
Activity: 966
Merit: 1004
CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!
Quickseller/ ACCTseller (they are both the same person) sold me this hero account a few months ago for 1.1 BTC. He assured me that the account was not hacked.

Until after the transaction, I find this thread https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/account-hacked-help-plz-741302

Which is a dispute between the original owner (ownership is proven in the thread) and Quickseller. This is the equivalent of me buying a used car that was stated to have never been in a car accident and then finding out afterwards that the car had indeed been in a car accident.

As a result of this dispute, this account received numerous negative trust ratings and I have not been able to get it in a signature campaign since (the intended use). Therefore, I cannot make my investment back.

Quickseller REFUSES to take responsibility and does not want the account back (for obvious reasons).

Please ban these accounts:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/quickseller-358020
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/acctseller-357263
Jump to: