Topic: Trust Abuse - Lutpin - With Reasons - page 3. (Read 3031 times)

Should this not be between Luptin and OP,see no need for the gang up. Even if it is just to support it does not look good seeing it in every accusation thread.

Kinda irrelevant seeing that the OP indicated it wasn't the same account but refused to provide any proof (even in private) of owning 4 or at least 2 accounts with the same stats. Yes, there might be some shades of gray somewhere in this story but unless the OP can come with an explanation that is plausible, verifiable, and doesn't contradict earlier stories (seems impossible but what do I know) then it's safe to assume it's just a failed scam attempt.

Well I am still not sure about the neutral rating though. Like I said before, a borrower/seller can continue to attempt to sell an asset being held as collateral while there is a loan against it, and if both the borrower and lender are smart, they will both benefit from such loan.


Trying to derail the thread?

Okay I really need to break down Op's plan then:

1.He was taking a loan out by putting his account as collateral.
2.He had put the same account for auction.
3.Once he gets the loan,he will surely default it
4.The account will be sold in the meantime
5.Since the loan is defaulted ,unaware of it,the new owner of the account get's a negative trust.
6.OP makes 0.04 + 0.04 by selling/defaulting loan by the same account.

You are. I didn't leave OP a negative rating, at any point.

---

It's not supposed to prove anything, I posted that for fun.

I believe that I saw Lutpin give the OP negative trust for this same issue (it now appears to have been removed), although I may be mistaken.

I am not sure what the reasoning behind the neutral even is. The OP is trying to take out a loan, which means he has some immediate need for cash, which applies to every other person who is attempting to take out a loan.

Sorry ,I'm not aware of the general matters but in this case I was the one who messaged Lutpin and asked to give OP a negative trust which he didn't. Although it was quite obvious that OP was taking the loan on the same account as collateral which he was auctioning,Lutpin left him a neutral feedback.Not sure how this is miss use of DT power.You might have other issues which I'm not aware of but as far as the current thread is concerned ,the feedback is 100% accurate.

I would tend to agree that Lutpin probably should not be in the DefaultTrust network, as he does seem to be inconsistent in his trust ratings and leaves a lot of negative trust ratings for things that are really not scams.

I would say that there is a good chance that Lutpin is more closely associated with CG then just being a chat moderator, although I am not 100% certain that he is an alt of either of the owners. He did (as did mixxer-2) put in a lot of effort into getting me to remove my negative ratings for the CG accounts.

There are no rules against having multiple accounts, and many people who farm accounts are likely to have many accounts that have roughly similar stats. Also any lender considering to lend BTC while taking collateral to secure such loan should make sure that the collateral is worth more then the loan amount in order to protect himself against a default. A smart lender will require collateral that is worth much more then the amount of the loan in order to give sufficient incentives for the borrower to repay, and the will result in the lender making more money from the borrower defaulting verses the borrower repaying the loan as agreed.

A smart borrower who needs BTC (cash) quickly will take out a loan using some asset that he is trying to sell to satisfy his immediate cash needs, and then can use the proceeds from the sale to repay the loan plus interest, and keep the difference. For example if someone were to own a 5 BTC casascius coin, and need 5 BTC quickly could take out a 5 BTC loan using such coin as collateral, then continue to attempt to sell the coin while the loan is outstanding, thus avoiding having to sell the coin at a "fire sale" price. As long as the coin is unredeemed, it will be worth much more then the 5 BTC loan, and if the borrower ends up defaulting on the loan, then the lender would likely make a lot more money selling the coin, even at a fire sale price then if the borrower had repaid the loan.

Edit: also that signed message above does not prove anything as it is not associated with your account in any way. It is also possible to buy private keys (which are somewhat frequently traded, especially for reasons like to redeem CLAMs), so considering that there are dust amounts in that address does not even prove that the BTC sent to that address was the result of BTC being sent to you.

Well, fine I think I should lock it now

Guys its my mistake I tried to raise voice, sorry Lutpin and all, good luck , message e for any uestions

---

On a more serious note, what's the point of a public thread, if you don't want people to comment on it?

It's no where mentioned that I have to show of all my accounts to someone or else I am a scammer. If its listed please show me I will show you, if not then well you can give me red trust but you aren't having any reason for it, just because I said something to Lutpin you guys came crowding

And wait man, in case I was auctioning same account then how it makes me a scammer ? Because you can assume that but how can you be sure ?

I knew before opening this thread that it wont be good as you guys are one and dont even want to listen, but well , yeah my mistake. I forgot we have to live with the bosses

Your answer to #5 sounds like you're not happy with Lutpin's neutral and itching for a negative. Why would anyone want to buy your accounts? Just show that you were not lying and not trying to scam.

Are you dumb ? Can't you read ? For the last time,the discussion is not above signature campaigns.

Okay.Scamming could be fun indeed.Not when you're caught.

Sorry not interested in dealing with a scammer.You're trying to make your way out.Why can't you prove that you own the other two accounts with the same stats and you had no bad intentions at all ?I think if you cared about your Rep you'd not be running away with reasons to not show the ownership of the accounts.

1) Agree I thought it might be bad,and I agree I made post with wrong account but when I am not SPAMMING with signature then I think there is no problem ?

2) Yes indeed to avoid that.

3) Yes I told you, I dont want children to play in wrong playground

4) Yes i do have, so whats the problem

5) Agree to buy them for BIN 0.06 BTC each with a escrow and I will happily sell you

1.You delete comment
2.Next comment you post like nothing happened
3.You lock the thread
4.Claim to be having multiple accounts with same stats (Apparently)
5.Can you prove you have multiple accounts with same stats and you had no intentions of defaulting the loan ? Not to me,take any trusted member ,prove him the ownership of at least 2 Full Member accounts with same stats .End of discussion.

Dear friend I wasn't selling same account, cant we have 2 accounts with same stats ? I mean made on same day then both have same activity ( assuming both posts regularly )


Wow , you won a medal . Its not a kid's thing friend, think what I am saying since hours and you will understand. If not then ask your parents to tell you, not everything we kids can understand

Ah and yes the thread was locked so that kids dont find a playground at wrong place lol

And good job done detective , I will tip you a car ( sorry a toy one though )

The discussion is not about having multiple accounts or sig spamming.You were about to scam people,the lender and the account buyer.Why would you lock the thread after I busted your scam ? Admit it mate,you deserve the feedback ,in fact I'd ask DT to give you a negative.

The problem is not that you're selling an account. The problem is that you're selling an account while at the same time trying to sell the same account disguising it as a loan

I usually ignore trolls like you, seems Lutpin loves taunting people like you though  

Edit: Also, no. Account sales aren't allowed, they are discouraged but community consensus is that they should be permitted to at least prevent the scams done from an account sold in the forum

Fun fact: this is my first bitcoin address holding the first bitcoins I ever earned: 1NDJowuMso8iDdZoEDhZy4nYZNXqUPpTzm.
It's only 48k sat, but they are worth a fortune to me.
That address was first seen on Apr 09, 2013 @ 10:31 pm
And that is how I can in 6 monhs learn "so much about bitcoins".

---

Well, if we are not allowed to own more than 1 account then get it as a rule from Theymos and I will happily follow it. And this thread is not because of what you think. I never spam with signature campaigns too as you may see, like you and others.

I am 100% sure buy/sell accounts here is allowed and if Lutpin is legit and honest ( which i agree he is ) then why you are having so much trouble if a thread was opened to ask some questions ? Its like you dont want to give exam because you know all of it ?