Topic: Stingleword to Flux loan of 1 BTC (Read 2559 times)

Verified, repaid early. Thanks for everything; the experience was worth more than the interest!

I won't be getting into the loan business. This relatively safe loan was enough of a clencher for me!

Hi all, this loan has been completed,
and sorry to everyone who got upset about it.

TXID

https://blockchain.info/tx/7b641ce8948d12c33df9c3be7b24d96f83851b7be9130eb2e6e3f645edcd44a0

Thanks again Stingleword and sorry if you got a bunch of grief about this.

Let's move on to the next, positive and inspiring topic.

Have a good day everyone

-flux

This is the weirdest loan I have seen. The amount is too high. No collateral. (I assume this. Can't be sure though). 20% interest rate? Stingleword lending newbie?

But I don't believe there is any foul play involved. I have myself lend a newbie.  
He will keep extending it. Probably when I get 80 or so,...


Edit: Looks like Stingleword answered everything ^^

I scrolled past most of the thread, but Id like to add my opinion on this. Take it or leave I dont care.

Yes, a faked loan (Im not saying this is one(!!)) can look suspicious, but I doubt anyone here can judge whether its fake or not. Leave a positive/negative feedback once the trade is done (un)successful and link to this thread. Anyone that cares enough about it can follow this discussion with their pros and cons and make up their own mind about the legitimacy of the ratings. IMHO the ref link is the most important part of trust feedback left. I understand that some business can not do this due to possible privacy issues, but otherwise it should be the default as its the only way to give the rating context.

Yeah, this isn't a "here's some play money" loan, this is "I want to high roll but my tax check is delayed". This is a very significant risk for me.


I simply have enough confidence in his past behavior on Lucky Bit. I don't see him as a "newbie account", I see him as an old player that hasn't been active on Bitcoin Talk because he hasn't really needed to.


As I stated, the purpose of this thread is to document the loan, and correctly use the trust system to reflect this loan. Since I have now been informed (rather, beaten with the fact) that this is somehow an inappropriate use of the trust system, I simply wished to use this thread as a failsafe documentation. I still disagree with you about reputation; I am risking my bitcoin, after all.


Of course it isn't leverage, it's a plan B. If I lose my bitcoin, I can warn others in the Lucky Bit community and I have evidence to back up my claims.  His reputation here is actually not the issue, considering I'm the one taking the risk! What about my reputation here? If I give a loan to someone and they do repay it, doesn't that mean I should receive a positive trust rating? Even if the person issuing the trust is not very active, how does that invalidate their recognition of my acceptance of risk?


No. I don't make exceptions for promotions, and with good reason! I already run a handful of other promotions, and people are always looking for ways to cheat. It would be stupid to make an exception, because regular players at Lucky Bit would have precedent to demand special treatment in the signature campaign and other promotions. I deal with enough of that already, thank you!

Yes, flux is a known user at Lucky Bit. He just doesn't have a lot of activity or business here. According to you, this is unusual; however, it is my experience that the big gamblers are not active on Bitcoin Talk or the on-site chat room. engineer, jadra, flux, rastafarai - many of our best winners were newbie-rank accounts when they hit their big wins.


I don't see "most people". I see two other accounts making slightly negative comments without a lot of substance or contribution, and I see the Montgomery Burns of account traders throwing a Category 3 Shitstorm. Not gonna sugar-coat it, but from this side of the aisle it looks like one guy, two sock puppets, and a bucket of butt-hurt.

Come on, man. You know who I am and what I do. You deal in alts, you know the business in and out and you know this isn't a shady deal. I'm putting up a decent sized risk, and all I'm asking for is the opportunity to be appropriately noted as having done so, and to use the same system everyone else does to proceed. If flux wants to begin a bitcoin project, should his trustworthiness be tainted simply because he borrowed a couple hundred bucks from me? Does my trustworthiness somehow become tainted because I chose to take this risk?

Is this really worth your intervention?

The reputation aspect of this is a bit fishy and if its a private loan I think it should be kept off the forums, not just used as a tool to build up trust that doesn't hold any weight with it.

That is what was implied by you both saying that you wanted the OP to establish himself within the community. This is also roughly between 20 and 33 times the size of most gambling loans here BTW.
Lending to a newbie account (even if it registered a year ago) is almost certainly going to be a bad idea. Like I said in my first reply, I don't think you would are naive enough to be lending to newbie accounts. You either have a good enough relationship with the guy so that you are confident that he is not going to throw away your friendship/relationship over a few hundred dollars or making this loan is a horrible decision.
Making this loan public is not going to give you any kind of leverage or anything else to help you get your money back. His reputation is already worth nothing, with the exception of the very few people who might think it is a good idea to lend to a newbie. If he did default on the loan, there would be nothing to stop him from abandoning his account and creating a new one. Trust me, people make new accounts pretty much every day trying to take out loans, and over 99.99% of them end up abandoning their account when the loan is not filled, the other .01%~ end up abandoning their account when someone lends them money.
See my above response. Me giving him negative trust because he defaulted on a loan is not going to affect the value of his reputation (and people tend to value my trust IMO).
If he is active in the Lucky Bit community and gambles there a lot then make an exception. It would be stupid not to make an exception if this is the case. The purpose of the restrictions on giveaways is to prevent people for creating/using a large number of newbie accounts in order to claim giveaways multiple times. If it is overwhelming obvious it is not the case with this person, then you want to keep your most active customers happy. There is almost always a correlation between activity on gambling sites  and activity/posts on the forum, however there are some exceptions, according to you, this is one of them. 
As mentioned above, and highlighted by KWH, you stated that the purpose of the loan was to improve his reputation. If you honestly think lending to this person is worth he risk then there is nothing wrong with providing trust.
There is nothing against the rules of the forum, although most people would agree that this would be against the standards that the community has set over time. Since this thread is not breaking any rules then it would not get deleted.

Flux came to me on Lucky Bit and asked for a nonessential loan. I deliberated for over a day and decided to do it. Since he was recently disqualified from a Lucky Bit contest because his account is new, I thought it would be good to document the loan here so that (a) he can get more established on the forum without spamming, (b) I can appropriately document the loan and use the trust system correctly (which, bafflingly, is not at all in this case but I can accept that), and (c) I have an independent documentation of the loan in case unanticipated default occurs and I can at least use it to warn others.

So, using a lending subforum to document a loan, as also an opportunity for the recipient to get a couple of posts without spamming, while providing me with documentation in case i need recourse, was my intent. Was this a mistake? Have I violated the forum rules or the code of conduct by offering the loan and using this forum to document it? Is there something I should do differently?


Okay. That's not true - the primary reason for the loan was to give him a little gambling money before he gets his tax check.


It's not like we're buddy buddy - we know each other from an internet chat room and we've discussed entering into a business relationship over time but we haven't exactly been working together or anything. At least, not for a while.


But if he doesn't, I have documentation to show others. If he rips me off without documentation, my accusations are null.


Unless it isn't documented here and associated with his account, in which case he gets away with it.


Would it help dispel your doubt to look at his recent post count, and find the post where he tried to enter a contest and was disqualified - by me - for being a newbie account? He's being cut out of promotions run by his favorite site, and I saw this as an opportunity for him to pick up a post or two since I wanted to have this documentation anyway. The post count and trust were never the primary motives here, and if restating that fact and explaining the intimate and frankly none of your business details of this loan aren't enough to satisfy you, then I honestly do not understand why the lending section and trust features even exist.

By issuing this loan, I have taken a risk. Why should I not be allowed to mitigate this risk by documenting the loan, and why is it inappropriate to use the trust rating to reflect the risk that I took?

If this is just not allowed, then we can just delete the thread, eliminating any incentive for anyone to accuse me of shady operations. Ironic considering the majority of my activity here but I will do what is appropriate. Flux, the loan is still on even if we have to do it off the books. I trust you, so I guess that and your phone number are what I will rely on for assurance that I'll get my money back. Not ideal, but I don't want to cause trouble and I do want to help you out (and make a quick 0.2BTC in the process). If it helps you get closer to Jr. Member, great; if not, well, that's okay.

Ok so can we just call this a document between me and stingle and I expect no reputation for credibility or future lending? Even have it moved to a miscellaneous part of the forum so as not to be confused with a trust earning loan ? Does that work for everyone ?

My interpretation of the purpose of the loan based on what was posted by both you and timeflux is that the primary reason for the loan is to establish his credibility.

There is nothing wrong with lending him money based on some prior relationship, however if there is some prior relationship the chances of him repaying are much greater verses if the loan was from some other lender. Therefore him pointing to this thread to give himself credibility would be misleading unless another potential lender were to have a similar relationship with him.

If no one from Lucky Bit is guaranteeing this loan, then I honestly do not see the point of this thread. If there is a preexisting relationship then he can contact you through the channels that he knows you from to get an address to pay you back. If he were to default then his account is not going to be trusted with any kind of loan or any kind of trade without escrow anyway. If you really want to allow him to increase his post count (which I personally doubt) then there are plenty of non-spammy ways he can do this either in the lending section or the majority of the other sections of the forum.

Right i agree. We could either delete this topic entirely if people are going to feel that negatively about it. And or I could give back the loan.
Totally cool with whatever, sorry this post ended up i a negative fashion and don't want to offend anyone here.

Loan was just for fun until i got some very large payments from projects I am working on,
Stingle wanted to document it somehwere. Sorry if we broke the rules of gaining trust cred whatever,
not my intention to be false or shady. Just let me know a solution to solve this negative argument and find a positive resolution that is good for all.

Thanks

- flux

You've been here long enough to know rep loans are a red flag.
You already said you did it to help build Trust in the community for your friend.
Next, it was to up post count which is another infraction.
After that it was for sig. campaigns.
Now it's a stop gap until tax refund.
Which is it?

Whoah, whoah! If we don't put a trust rating, it's not for the purpose of improving trust. Yowzer! This was a loan to cover a gap while he waits for a tax refund, not a staged loan.

Trust rating will not be left for this loan because apparently doing a favor for a friend isn't a trustworthy action.


Hang on, this isn't a Lucky Bit sanctioned loan. This is me, the person, stingleword, lending flux, another person, some money as a favor so they don't have to wait for a check. I don't have a guarantee he's going to pay me back; I am simply trusting him based on my relationship with him and if he makes good on that trust, it seems to me that he has earned the right to point at it and say that he was good for it. Maybe he doesn't necessarily need it, but does that mean that this is immediately a suspicious transaction and shouldn't even be documented here?

Should I ask for my money back now because the community doesn't approve? I don't even know what I'm supposed to do here.

The issue is not the fact that trust is (or is not) left, the issue is that he can now go back and point to this thread to say that he repaid this loan, a loan that he apparently does not need. This will give him credibility to other potential trading partners and potential lenders in the future. If binaryFate or someone else was going to guarantee the repayment of this loan then it would be one then, but if the only reason to document the loan this way is to give him additional credibility then this is very wrong.

Ok i kinda get it, man you guys are tough, don't blame you though, lots of scammers out there. Sorry if this shakes things up Stingle and tarnsihes your reputation at all. Let's just call it a documentation of loan agreement, as well as upping my post count, cus that's all it is.

And just how is this actual business when it is a staged loan for the sole purpose to improve Trust?

Wow, I didn't realize people were so freaked out about the trust system. Really, I just wanted to be able to document this loan. Would it help if we did not leave trust after the loan, and simply documented it here? The posts are more important than the trust - flux is new to bitcoin talk, so he's not eligible for some promotions that Lucky Bit runs even though he's a regular player there, and instead of trolling off-topic I felt it would be more sensible to conduct actual business to help improve his post count.

Most of the community feels the same way. You are making your Trust bogus.

Thank you Stingleword, and of course I will not make you or myself look like any idiot. As I said i would like to develop a name around here and hopefully that will lead to co-workers and investors for future projects.

KWH sorry you feel that way.

Because you are doing a "reputation loan", all loans or trades will now be suspect from you both. Your Trust will be suspect and pretty much meaningless.
Are you also vouching for him? You will cover and and all scams if they happen?