Topic: User Yahoo62278 is a brutal account seller and (Read 1350 times)

I'm not sure if I understand correct, but it seems to me that in this statement you are saying that censure/mark spammers raises prices of Bitcointalk accounts.. It can be interesting tool...

---

Maybe you're right, and SMAS has very little meaning in the dealings, so we do not have to worry about.
But it is always good to talk - people can have own thoughts about that..

Bask in its glory 'cause its true.
Heh, remember when that happened to me and I was all "Nah, couldn't be that easy could it?"


*OT post but who cares... custom sig deals all the way

Let me say this first: your signature makes me cringe.


No, IMHO anyone should be able to buy and sell as many accounts as they want. Should it lead to spam, its for staff to handle and - if needed - ban the person with all accounts they hold. Someone that buys an account in order to ROI on it via signature campaign(s) has a high interest to avoid spam as it would destroy their investment (the account). Another point - originally brought up by Salty IIRC (sorry no ref) - is that open account sales and signature campaigns together make it more difficult for scammers to ROI on a bought account. Simplified the argument is: account sales are public thus people trust accounts less in general which lowers the amount that can be scammed w/o significant work (long cons); signature campaigns offer a legit way to ROI on a bought acct which increases demand and thus price for accounts raising the amount needed to scam to ROI nefariously.


Auctions are often finished via PM, please show us the related scam accusation.


I have been discussing this topic with Lauda for quite some time and my latest information on this is that Lauda is reviewing these ratings. Be that as it may, it changes nothing about yahoos position on DT.

---

SMAS is just a list for a few members, it does not apply to all campaigns and I think its better that these members put their list in the public instead of doing the same in secret. I have no doubt that campaign managers frequently warn each others about spammers to reduce their workload. I think there can be improvements made to SMAS, but overal its a good idea against spam. One improvement I offered in the past was to check whether or not someone should be on SMAS or not. I have yet to receive a list of accounts I should check, it seems either your signature misrepresents me or there is no strong interest in getting this done. I could do it blind as well, a few of the accounts could not be on SMAS and Id have to find those that should be. If SMAS is all you have, it wont be enough to get yahoo removed from DT.

---

I dont think those 98 days are wasted.

---

No, a newbie has no history. The question whether or not someone should be on DT is the same as "are the ratings they leave helpful to me?" For me this answer is yes for yahoo. I had some issues with some ratings they left, handled it rather poorly on my end, but they came around and changed them.

---

Thats not really how it works. You just log in one day and boom your inbox is full of PMs, because newsflash someone put you on DT. Everyone needs some time to adapt to this. Depending on your past ratings this can take some time.

---

That might be true, but I dont see any evidence of this and I dont think SMAS has enough influence to make this profitable. Besides, due to its public nature anyone could verify and more importantly dispute being on that list.

There is no proof of said accusation.

He did have/sell a few accounts in the past from what I see. He has seen why account trading is bad, and has long stopped doing it AFAIK.

---

FYI 1 account doesn't make you an account farmer. You should have properly written down the total amount that was sold.

I couldn't care less about what you think 'should' or 'should not' be. DT members are most certainly not "experts" and do not need to "teach others". You're confused.

---

This thread is useless, and your 5th attempt at attacking Yahoo. Add this to the list of failed ones.

AFAIK most of those were left prior to him becoming DT, which is fine I guess. He is here to learn, and that's what he did by discussing and removing them.

You mentioned me in the OP, what did you expect?

Selling accounts alone is not a reason for yahoo to be discredited. There are many very trustworthy people that have traded accounts in the past, a fairly large number actually. 

Although the SMAS participation does create a conflict of interest. The question of if yahoo can manage this conflict of interest in a way so that he does not profit from his position can be discussed by others. 

The list is transparent, therefore anyone can review the users that are on it. You can't really do malicious damage undetected.

Yawn, not this again

Those were feedbacks that he left before he was DT.

Comparing apples and oranges again, are we?

---

What is the goal here? To get him removed from DT? To get him neg. rated?

Simple: I'll take all the users from his list and add them into mine. Therefore, he does nothing but use SMAS. Therefore, your concern is invalid. Looks like you are either:
1) A butthurt troll.
2) Someone who got their shit accounts blacklisted.

---

Anyone is free to use or not to use SMAS.

Its not a 'crime' , people have different standards when handing out negs and pos ratings and account selling happens to be something lauda is against. I've seen many spammers improving and account sellers choosing not to do so later on. I think even Lauda himself was banned at one point(albeit temporarily) in his early days, Dabs was copy-pasting stuff(which too can get you banned) , Ognasty was found escrowing for his friend(eh we're getting off-track here)

And hilarious how you think you can coerce someone into handing out a neg because that person gives out a rating to others for doing the same.

Edit: Forgot the reason I dropped by here. Completely agree with what you have on your sig

This forum believes in second chance that's why there are DT members that removes their negative feedback once they see the person changed their ways. I even know a DT member who created a thread to buy accounts with red flags but now he is in the DT list, but that doesn't make him a scammer or a type of person who cannot be trusted actually he is a cool guy in this forum.

I don't see any evidence of him being neither a scammer nor a spammer.

Proof?

Leaving a negative rating for a opinion or criticism is not justifiable. That said, I can't take these 'attack with alts' tactic seriously. Anyone who supports them has horrible judgement.

He never hid the fact that he did sell accounts in the past. "Brutally" is a complete exaggeration, as the number of sold accounts is unknown.

Wake me up once you post with your main account. Otherwise, I can't take this seriously. These futile attempts won't have any effect on Yahoo.

---

This is your 5th thread about Yahoo.

How did you connect Yahoo62278 and sellsrmember? Can you also post that information here as well and I hope you noticed that sellsrmember account last logged in this forum was more than a year ago.

Well, see this

Just check this user : https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/sellsrmember-542429

Made from starting to just sell and buy accounts ( mainly sell )

and hence a potential serious signature spammer, and where are those guys who tag account sellers ?

Basically because its a trusted member selling/buying accounts brutally you allow him ?


And yes , an auction which was abandoned without any information and this is quite rubbish.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12133013

To lauda : you give -ve trust to people for selling accounts and encouraging members to earn from sigs from multiple accounts ( see : http://prntscr.com/e8j4uf ) and yourself working with a brutal account seller dude ?