This is not fair, LFC_Bitcoin | Bitcointalksearch.org

The-One-Above-All

member

Activity: 252

Merit: 56

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on June 21, 2019, 09:24:06 AM

Sadly for you, Quickscammer, nobody that matters will do this. Have fun recruiting a load of red trusted shit posters with less than 250 Merits between them, therefore, unable to have a say on anything.

I would suggest people distrust you but you’re already so distrusted & shamed across the whole bitcointalk.org community that there doesn’t seem a point.

Have a great day!

Edit - Just for the LOLS - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=358020

LFC bitcoin should be excluded from trust lists

This message confirms he is merely a bitch for others that are confirmed scammers and liars like lauda

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on May 22, 2019, 07:41:19 AM

bill, I feel like a right ass hole but Lauda messaged me ... about you. She told me I should remove you from my trust list. I really didn’t want to do it because I do like you (a lot).

For my own comfort & to make my life easier I did it. I don’t want to get on the wrong side of them.

I am really sorry & I feel a dick for doing it. I had to tell you myself though before you see it yourself.

I hope you can forgive me.

LFC

Laudas Feltching Clown

How can such a pathetic dreg be on DT. A weasel and puppet.

In this instance it is gray, i don't like no collateral loans but if a senior member wishes to risk his account hero/legend for a very small loan then this could be viewed as leverage to get them to repay. I expect the account would be worth more if they sold it than this. Not that we support selling accounts either.

Really it should not be a red trust for hero to ask for such a tiny loan as non collateral - certainly NOT a flag now. It is the responsibility of the person loaning to do their own DD. We should not ask potentially innocent members to be paying for the greed and stupidity of others. You could view their rep and work to build the account as leverage to some degree.

xolxol

member

Activity: 241

Merit: 98

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on June 21, 2019, 05:04:56 AM

Russian shit poster who has a worthless account due to red trust.

i guess you arent stupid at all! im sorry but you're a wanker,rubbish racist douche twat.
Im not a russian einstein.

LFC_Bitcoin

legendary

Activity: 3556

Merit: 9709

#1 VIP Crypto Casino

Sadly for you, Quickscammer, nobody that matters will do this. Have fun recruiting a load of red trusted shit posters with less than 250 Merits between them, therefore, unable to have a say on anything.

I would suggest people distrust you but you’re already so distrusted & shamed across the whole bitcointalk.org community that there doesn’t seem a point.

Have a great day!

Edit - Just for the LOLS - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=358020

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

Based on LFC_Bitcoin’s response here, his trust rating, among other things, I have excluded him from my trust list. I would encourage others to do the same.

You can exclude him from your trust list by adding the following to your trust list:

Code:

~LFC_Bitcoin

LFC_Bitcoin

legendary

Activity: 3556

Merit: 9709

#1 VIP Crypto Casino

Quote from: El duderino_ on June 20, 2019, 06:51:40 PM

Quote from: xolxol on June 20, 2019, 06:35:07 PM

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on June 19, 2019, 05:21:39 PM

Is there going to be an interrogation in Reputation every time some random 0 trust account gets red trust?
The OP has no place questioning this, the fucking idiot.

if it comes from abuser like you there will be,smegma,copy paste redtag abuser like you should be remove from your awful unrightful position.

Still I would instant loan LFC some in BTC, I wouldn't trust you Roll Eyes

So why is he in a unrightfully position?? Seems like the only position where he as a to trust member should be ....

Ignore him mic, he’s just another butt hurt Russian shit poster who has a worthless account due to red trust.

xolxol

member

Activity: 241

Merit: 98

Quote from: El duderino_ on June 20, 2019, 06:51:40 PM

Quote from: xolxol on June 20, 2019, 06:35:07 PM

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on June 19, 2019, 05:21:39 PM

Is there going to be an interrogation in Reputation every time some random 0 trust account gets red trust?
The OP has no place questioning this, the fucking idiot.

if it comes from abuser like you there will be,smegma,copy paste redtag abuser like you should be remove from your awful unrightful position.

Still I would instant loan LFC some in BTC, I wouldn't trust you Roll Eyes

So why is he in a unrightfully position?? Seems like the only position where he as a to trust member should be ....

what the?i really dont understand what are you trying to say.Let me guess your an asslicker,trying to get some trust from abusers like them.

El duderino_

legendary

Activity: 2688

Merit: 13334

BTC + Crossfit, living life.

Quote from: xolxol on June 20, 2019, 06:35:07 PM

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on June 19, 2019, 05:21:39 PM

Is there going to be an interrogation in Reputation every time some random 0 trust account gets red trust?
The OP has no place questioning this, the fucking idiot.

if it comes from abuser like you there will be,smegma,copy paste redtag abuser like you should be remove from your awful unrightful position.

Still I would instant loan LFC some in BTC, I wouldn't trust you Roll Eyes

So why is he in a unrightfully position?? Seems like the only position where he as a to trust member should be ....

xolxol

member

Activity: 241

Merit: 98

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on June 19, 2019, 05:21:39 PM

Is there going to be an interrogation in Reputation every time some random 0 trust account gets red trust?
The OP has no place questioning this, the fucking idiot.

if it comes from abuser like you there will be,smegma,copy paste redtag abuser like you should be remove from your awful unrightful position.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on June 19, 2019, 05:21:39 PM

I don’t really see how anybody can question it to be honest.

He has 0 verified positive trust for previous trades
He has no collateral

He is wearing a sig & avatar for a campaign he isn’t even accepted in
He has previous unfulfilled loan applications

If anybody has an issue with my feedback they’re welcome to prove me wrong & risk lending him thd 0.05BTC but I somehow think that won’t happen.

I noticed your negative feedback before this topic was opened. On the one hand, I too think it was a bit harsh. But on the other hand, the request for an "education loan" without saying how he's planning to pay it back, looks a lot like an exit scam. 0.05 BTC is a lot of money for that account.

Quote from: El duderino_ on June 20, 2019, 05:01:58 AM

T'ill today I have had two people asking me for a loan (BTC-loan), still not knowing I did good with not tagging them actually, also been a while, going through my PM's and see what I will do with those....

Unless it's someone you've done business with before, asking someone who's not in the lending business for a loan is even more shady. That just means they assume you're an easy source of money.

creeps

full member

Activity: 742

Merit: 144

Being a hero account doesn't mean you can't scam, everyone can scam people despite of their rankings just like on the previous loan before with other lender.

Having a 2 declined loan application before is not a good history after all, he must know how to provide collateral if he can really pay the amount of the loan. I appreciate the effort of LFC_Bitcoin to warn the lender because he might got lose big money, I guess it can still be deleted if there's no transactions being made well its all up to LFC_Bitcoin. This is not unfair, this is just a fair warning.

El duderino_

legendary

Activity: 2688

Merit: 13334

BTC + Crossfit, living life.

Imo nothing wrong and the warning is @ its place.... Just asking a loan without collateral = shady and will go wrong in many cases, so a warning is due and then the members can decide what they do, probably ignore....

T'ill today I have had two people asking me for a loan (BTC-loan), still not knowing I did good with not tagging them actually, also been a while, going through my PM's and see what I will do with those....

ThatRandom8543

sr. member

Activity: 1344

Merit: 307

Its surprising it took the creation of this thread for OP to realize that LFC was within his right to leave a negative feedback. Any user has the right to leave a feedback on any user as they deem it necessary, which can be a caution to other users, or give other users their feedback on how things went when dealing with the user. While not every person who ask for a loan gets a negative feedback (a few rare cases from what ive seen), a user who is new, has not posted in an extremely long time (eg 6+ months), recently changed email and/or password (and cant prove ownership), has no realistic trust, positive trading history, or no good and constructive post that ask for a loan will 99% of the time will take the money and not pay a sat back.

Its probably best for OP to go on and lock this thread since it looks like things are now figured out and it serve no further purpose other than for people to rant.

LFC_Bitcoin

legendary

Activity: 3556

Merit: 9709

#1 VIP Crypto Casino

Quote from: actmyname on June 19, 2019, 05:16:32 PM

Quote from: Thule on June 19, 2019, 04:27:38 PM

Quote

who may not be aware that no collateral loans are red flags

That's not your decission

Well it is, though. It's LFC's decision to leave feedback. To LFC, the user is high-risk.

We have different standards for high-risk/untrustworthy behavior. After all, the changed system is to incentivize users to investigate the feedback on a given user.

I don’t really see how anybody can question it to be honest.

He has 0 verified positive trust for previous trades
He has no collateral

He is wearing a sig & avatar for a campaign he isn’t even accepted in
He has previous unfulfilled loan applications

If anybody has an issue with my feedback they’re welcome to prove me wrong & risk lending him thd 0.05BTC but I somehow think that won’t happen.

Is there going to be an interrogation in Reputation every time some random 0 trust account gets red trust?
The OP has no place questioning this, the fucking idiot.

actmyname

copper member

Activity: 2562

Merit: 2510

Spear the bees

Quote from: Thule on June 19, 2019, 04:27:38 PM

Quote

who may not be aware that no collateral loans are red flags

That's not your decission

Well it is, though. It's LFC's decision to leave feedback. To LFC, the user is high-risk.

We have different standards for high-risk/untrustworthy behavior. After all, the changed system is to incentivize users to investigate the feedback on a given user.

Thule

sr. member

Activity: 938

Merit: 276

Quote

who may not be aware that no collateral loans are red flags

That's not your decission

Harlot

hero member

Activity: 1806

Merit: 672

The tag was appropriate for me, she doesn't have any previous transactions before and she has attempted to ask for a loan without collateral for a lot of times now all of which are denied because it will be risky for them to cover it for an unknown person. The tag doesn't stop people from covering it so its still really the member's choice if any of them wants to cover it. But do you think even without the tag given by LFC_Bitcoin it would increase her chances of matching is collateral-free loan? I don't think so.

ChemicalSpillage

member

Activity: 62

Merit: 41

Quote from: marlboroza on June 19, 2019, 09:07:24 AM

Btw, warningsigns started with 0.075BTC loan, if I am not wrong that was around 650$ back then (this loan request is around 450$) and amount eventually become big (IIRC it was loan - return - loan - return - loan - partially return - loan - exit scam).

The whole trick was to essentially use the interest as an investment in the exit scam.

Who cares about 10%, 20%, 30% when you simply take back 200% at the end of the act?

And if the lender is on DT and gives positive trust... oh lord.

marlboroza

legendary

Activity: 1932

Merit: 2272

Quote from: unibitcoinist on June 19, 2019, 07:10:03 AM

You have referred some example where the amount is higher than the one in this case.

Yep, well, I have referred example where amount is lower (in loan thread). There are plenty examples, from newbie to legendary members, scamming probably from 20$ above. I would have posted better examples but unfortunately theymos made access to trust pages very painful, these accounts came first to my mind.

Btw, warningsigns started with 0.075BTC loan, if I am not wrong that was around 650$ back then (this loan request is around 450$) and amount eventually become big (IIRC it was loan - return - loan - return - loan - partially return - loan - exit scam).

xolxol

member

Activity: 241

Merit: 98

Quote from: Joel_Jantsen on June 18, 2019, 06:47:10 PM

With all respect, I disagree with the Feedback left on the profile. Maybe a suggestion to lock to thread or asking reasons why they should be considered for a no-collateral loan could be done before tagging them. It makes sense to tag newbie throwaway accounts that come up with ridiculous requests but a genuine Hero member should be reviewed unless they have something shady going on with the account.

I'm just curious if I open a no-collateral loan request for 0.05 BTC will I be tagged as well?

Surely,if there are no double standards.These abusers are the reason why theymos decided to change/customize the system using flags.Negative trust abusers will be outcast if theymos is a man of his word.

unibitcoinist

member

Activity: 121

Merit: 40

Quote from: LFC_Bitcoin on June 19, 2019, 07:32:38 AM

If you think it’s inappropriate & he’s not seen as high risk maybe you could lend him the money without collateral?

As like other, I wouldn't consider giving him the loan but the tag would be inappropriate in case, the point brought by actmyname and Pamoldar wasn't exist. In that case, I would still fight that the tag was inappropriate.
But now, we have something to count his loan application as scam attempt which we didn't have earlier.

Topic: This is not fair, LFC_Bitcoin (Read 10329 times)