Topic: Selling Bitcointalk Trust - which subforum to use? - page 2. (Read 6264 times)

No its not like that.
Its like, If two guys trust each other, its called gay trust. If two gals trust each other, its lesbian trust. If cross trust each other, its straight trust.
As simple as that. Its all elementary

Hard to know what sexuality has to do with it.  But if you'd read closer, you'd note that you're very welcome to buy a trusted account from a "reputable" account seller.  So, I ask you, what's the difference?

How is gay trust different than normal trust?

If I trust a person and someone else trusts the same person, is that gay trust?

that's gay trust must be earned not bought by a newbie like myself

I guess I'm not completely surprised that you can't seem to see that satire is a form of argumentation which is not equavalent to trolling.


I'm curious if you've ever actually left positive trust for anyone who you didn't see as more powerful than you in some way or another.  You've revealed yourself many times as the kind of person who steps on people who you see as below you while kissing the asses of people you see as above you.  Anywhoo....

@Salty, your post seems to boil down to an observation that the system is irrational and we have this system because people have tolerated it.  That's certainly true, but highlighting the irrationality of this (as OP does) is one step towards making a better system, IMO.

What you're doing is very unintelligibly announcing that you accept bribery, assuming you are being honest, which is not likely the case. The forum's rules need to apply equally and fairly to everyone - and trust should be earned. You've just eradicated any chances of ever making money selling trust - every 'sale' is a honeypot, with the buyer willing to report your account for bribery. You will be quickly removed from the Default Trust, and those who remain will give you so much negative rep that your account will become basically worthless. You don't want that, and that's why you're not going to do this. Troll.

Yeah, it should work that way, although I can think of some instances where it doesn't.  We have a hardware vendor on this forum that abuses the self moderation privileges to the point where they are running a bot to cover up the the truth about their ongoing scams by using this bot to censor users.

The community effected by this company has raised holy hell about it and gotten nowhere.  They continue to run this bot after scamming millions out of people on false promises and are now using this bot on a new self-moderated thread to try to sell a new product.

I like the fact that the forum doesn't restrict activity very much and in principle agree with this laissez faire approach, although I do wonder how things are resolved at times and whether it's a whim, a rule, or the opinion of the community that ultimately decides.

Very good post, too bad it will fall on deaf ears (for the most part) by a few hard heads only wanting to stir up trouble.

I asked him how much he was charging, however he refused to answer, and is more evidence that he was trolling as opposed to actually selling trust.

They most likely did not have an account on default trust considering that he was banned for ban evading it would be likely that as of when he created the account that his other accounts were already banned, and as a result would be unable to leave positive trust (he was actually banned multiple times making it even less likely that is "main" account is both on default trust and not banned).
The reason is the same that it does not make sense to buy a trusted account and then scam. Default trust accounts have additional value because they are on default trust. It is unlikely that someone is going to be able to sell enough trust in order to make up the additional value their account has for being on default trust. It would be easy to detect when someone is selling trust, especially considering that someone could simply buy trust on an alt account and then whoever ends up leaving that person positive trust is the person selling trust and can be easily called out, and as a result would likely be removed from the default trust network. I was actually about to do this right before the OP was banned, but abandoned the idea once I saw that he was banned.

---

---

There have been some people in the past who have essentially been selling trust either via their escrow service or other services they offer (that are often overpriced). Many of them have been removed from default trust for a variety of reasons, while some others remain. Some people who are clearly trying to farm trust attempt to use these people's services.

The fact that trust is being defacto traded via various services makes the decision to leave positive trust for someone a much more complex question then it should be. If I had left positive trust for everyone that I provided escrow services to, on every occasion that I escrowed for them then a number of people who I personally find sketchy would show as having significant amounts of positive trust because of me which is not something I want.

There isn't much to understand. Why is selling trusted accounts ok? Because people say so. Why is selling trust not ok? Because people say so. There aren't rules, the community as a whole dictates what is ok and what isn't ok to do. For example, leaving feedback for someone you haven't traded with. Why is that ok? People have rationalized that it is necessary to preempt scammers, so it is an accepted practice, not a rule.

If I had to take a stab at guessing why people care more strongly about trust selling, is because the initial trust they receive could be a lie. Lets say someone has an account that they have completed 10 successful trades and have 10 positive feedback that they are selling. The trust adds to the value of the account. That value then is carried along at the time of sale. So say an account is 1 BTC, and the trusted account is worth 1.5 BTC because of the trust, the sale price is going to be 1.5 BTC, meaning the scammer buying the account will need to scam more than the 1.5 BTC, otherwise they lost money. Generally an account is going to be worth more than its trust because of the time put into the account, and sig campaigns, etc. I believe that is why buying trusted accounts to scam isn't a commonplace thing. Its just not profitable, but I could be entirely wrong, that is just my theory.

Say you wanted to buy trust, not the account. Your account is worth 1 BTC. You pay 0.1 BTC for the trust, and the feedback says that you were trusted with 50 BTC. Your account might then be worth 2 BTC (That is if people don't just disregard that kind of feedback from non well known people) you can then try to scam for 2 BTC, and if you succeed you made .9 BTC, making the act of buying trust possibly feasible.

That said, I still don't think that either is a commonplace thing, because all it takes is one guy to say, hey that trade looks fishy, make a thread about it, and everyone involved is marked a scammer, and whoever trusted that person on default trust on the first place would have to deal with a lot.... and I mean a lot of hate.

That all said, there were a lot of rational details that people overlooked here, so their panties got into a wad for nothing. First the OP didn't have a default trust account, they had no understanding of how the trust system worked. If they did have a trusted account, it was most likely on trust depth 3/4 which would be relatively meaningless. We don't know how much the OP was charging for trust and we don't know if their trusted account had any weight at all. I actually hoped that they did have a trusted account, because the only way to see how it would have all played out. I have a few theories on why selling trust isn't profitable either, but we would have had to see it in action.

So in conclusion, what is ok and not ok is dictated by the community. I think that people are more outraged by trust selling because it is more likely to be profitable for a scammer than buying an account outright. The reason the trust system has been in place this long and this topic is just coming up sort of speaks for itself.

I don't understand.  You seem to be emphsazing the point that there's no real difference in principle.  The question is this: why would it be okay to purchase a new account in order to subvert the trust system but it's not okay to simple purchase trust to subvert the trust system.  They are both ways to subvert the trust system but one is okay whereas the other isn't.

I think the difference is when you are buying a forum account you buy all the forum account (so also the positive, negative and neutral trust // with all his history). The problem is the "practice", and it is obviously that is not so intelligent buy directly trust when you can buy a "green forum account".

Exactly.  The satire here is quite clever.  Personally, I really think that the meaning behind the OP's suggestion ought to be addressed.  How is it okay to purchase an account with positive trust but not okay to just directly purchase the trust?  What's the principled difference there?

Wow! Your English skills are amazing! I hardly understand these type of English Blames! So complicated

Exactly how I feel. The direct "buying of trust" is very corrupt and is NO way at ANY advantage to the community unless you want there to be more and larger scams. Trust should ONLY be given for successful trades or sales.

Keeping feeding the trolls guys. Meta section is gonna be huge for those enrolled in a sig campaign.

A retard's?*


He will be removed from default trust list if he abuses. If he is removed, his trust will have less to no value. There is nothing shame to run this forum, it is shame he is going to sell trust. I think he is just trolling.

* Verb not noun.

What kind of joke is this? Buying people trust? What a shame just ruining this forum.

You Bespeak too much.

Just STFU with your caterwauling already.  Anyone with two brain cells to rub together saw this coming.  People warned you you'd pay for it, now just take what you've earned like a man, pussy-boy.

And BTW circumventing a ban is not likely to help your situation, so you just keep right on digging that hole you're in and I'll keep pissing down onto your head to keep you hydrated. 

Why?  Because Fuck You, that's why.

Obtuse moron.