Topic: VOD - Abusing Trust System (Read 4089 times)

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10887857

Please stop spamming your issues everywhere, thanks.  

I wish he would do it for me -> Remove the negative trust give me...Thanks!

ajw7989 locked his MSDN thread and promised to stop selling keys.  I have removed his negative trust.

It is normal, because no one will click on your trust point and read why do you have that negative trust. However you should contact Vod privately and ask if he can remove it (but I have read in his signature "Want your negative trust removed?  https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/want-to-get-your-negative-trust-removed-887515" you should wait one month).

But it actually does. Look at my tag now because Vod gave me one negative trust. Sure you can look at my feedback and see 20-30 people giving me positive trust but sad that one feedback can hurt u that much. How many people would take the time to look at the actual comment left

No one is abusing the trust system, it is only a negative trust and it should not stop you to trade here on bitcointalk.org ; you have only to use always a valid and trusted escrow.

This would probably be a question for Theymos. If you're going to start leaving negative feedback for these types of trades, you have to do it for everyone whether it's people selling unlimited HBOGo accounts, large amounts of gift cards, discounted drop shipping services, etc, as there is probable cause they are fraudulently obtained. It would essentially be confining the marketplace, which as a whole Theymos would probably not like because he's all about freedom. Also selectively using power to leave negative feedback when there are other people knowingly participating in the same activities is not good and in the long run wouldn't be a successful form of governance.

Here are the current Market Rules in case nobodies taken the time to read them - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/marketplace-rules-and-guidelines-3629

In my opinion, he did use a lot of their powers to impose on all the members of this forum.

If you want to stop all transactions here it is best not to have this forum and should not exist Bitcoin.

Or Do not put the list Marketplace here, Please remove it from forum

I would like to take a moment to dispell the notion that MSDN keys sold on the forum are taken from stolen retail MSDN accounts that cost some hapless souls thousands upon thousands of dollars.

Please familiarize yourself with the Microsoft Bizspark program. Under the Bizspark program you just need to set up a shell company with a website and declare yourself to be some kind of startup that intends to be a Microsoft soutions provider or ISV. You then send an application to Microsoft's Bizspark program which requires a $100 application fee. If your application looks legit enough, Microsoft will admit your company into the Bizspark program which lasts 3 years.

This entitles you to 1 Bizspark admin account which in turn can invite up to 4 other sub-accounts.  The main account and sub accounts each are entitled to 3 years worth of the MSDN Ultimate subscription, plus $150 of monthly Azure credits. So basically for $100 and a litlle know-how you get 3 years worth of 5x MSDN Ultimate subscriptions easily worth $180K retail if purchased on a yearly basis. Most of if not all of the keys, invites and admin accounts (well, of course) sold on this forum are from the Bizspark program.

So nobody is losing thousands of dollars from the sale of these MSDN keys.

Then in this case users should start to use always (yes always) an escrow, because no one know if someone is behind 2-3 or more forum accounts. This is the real problem of selling/buying account (and I think it will be never resolved). I don't use an escrow with the people that I know in the real life (this is normal, because I trust them). but almost always I have used an escrow service here in the forum for trade with the other person (that I don't know in real life).

PS: this is my personal choice, but I suggest always the use of an escrow for every deal.

Well trust does have some level of value and the fact that it is sold does degrade its value (and is not something that I will generally engage in). However someone that does buy trust one way or another is going to have an incentive not to scam because if they are caught trying to scam then they will lose all the value of the trust they have purchased.

The key to people protecting themselves is to be sure that one person is not being trusted with more money (both your money and other's money) then the value of their trust. As long as they are being trusted with less money then their trust is worth then they will generally not scam.

I'm pretty sure that many newbies could be tricked.


What's the point of a trust system if people are selling trust? Trust is like love, if you buy it, it's fake.

Members get negative feedback for trying to buy trust like in the loan section. That's not ok according to some.. but it's ok to buy accounts with positive trust? No negative feedback is left for them. What's the difference? The trust is still bought.

Well having positive trust means that your account has additional value and there is no reason why you should not try to get all of the value out of something when you sell it, that is how a free market works.

There are plenty of non scam reasons to buy a positive trust account, the prestige of having positive trust, the ability to potentially offer your services that would only be able to be sold by people with positive trust, are only two reasons that come to mind.  

You're missing the point chmod755 is trying to make. It's much easier to gain the trust of the person you're trying to con by using a green positive account then a account with no trust. A lot of the newer members around here trust accounts based on their positive feedback. Escrow should still be used but most of the time it isn't and that's when the scams happen.

I think you are missing the point, green trust doesn't mean you or someone else should not use an escrow. So also if a "scammer" will buy a positive trust forum account he cannot scam, because everyone know that "we" should use always an escrow.

I have no problem with buying / selling accounts in general (you can use them to join signature campaigns,etc.), but selling accounts with positive ratings is very questionable IMO

I think because it is not against the forum rules selling & buying forum accounts, or am I wrong? There are a few trusted users that are selling accounts here in the forum (for example Quickseller).

What I call abusing the trust system is selling rated accounts like this person here.

I'm wondering why this post has not been reported and why there's no negative rating on this user.

Edit: Just realized that the person who owns this account is willing to get the ratings removed.

How can we trust a liar? This is the real problem but I don't know if the negative trust is really necessary. It is a decision up to Vod and they should discuss privately. Why open a thread?

Vod may be a bit liberal with his down-ratings, but in your case I believe it's accurate. You tried to claim a negative rating for him, indicating a 21 BTC risked amount, which you later deleted. Then you claimed you would donate 19 BTC to charity, which is another lie (and probably multiple lies, since I suspect you don't even have 19 BTC to begin with).

Let's suppose I'm a liar, just for argument's sake, what about other people, you bombed with neg trust? Making up stories won't get you anywhere. Anyone can go to dev tools in their browsers and generate the screenshot you shared with everyone.


You need to accept you are a scumbag trying to manipulate the forums.

Never mind then. I was trying to be objective as much as possible, disregarding the status that you have here. I figured that you wouldn't make a mistake. I guess he was trying to get back at you which kind of tells us more about his character and one could even guess the age.

Check my post above this one.  I've proven he is shady and is a liar. 

Here is a peek into the basic honesty of this child liar.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10862102

Leaves me negative feedback saying he lent me 21 bitcoins, then deletes it and claims he didn't leave it.  

Much like people can be jailed before they are found guilty, this is a case when it is highly probable he is selling stolen keys.  He is welcome to verify his subscription with me if he wants, but it's also highly probable he won't do that.  

Well you can't say that he is a thief either. We don't have any evidence to go with. We can't say he's a thief just because this "seems shady". I actually believe that people are innocent until proven otherwise.

In the US you are innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If you are going to claim he is breaking the law then the burden is on you to prove they are not legally obtained.

So you are saying you can prove it's your MSDN subscription?

The keys never stop working. Which part of this you people don't get? Have you ever seen a report of the keys getting banned?

Also what about those selling accounts like netflix, they get banned within 30 days for sure? I don't see any objection there. That's a fucking credit card fraud. And MSDN key are legally obtained.
WTF you people don't get.

IMHO you should change the feedback to

Theft is no longer illegal?  You guys seem to forget about the people who are out the licenses when this happens.

Idol is no more than a petty thief.

Maybe you should have edited the negative trust. You could have just put up a warning there. Technically it is not illegal and the price suits the risks.

You could say the same thing about literally ANY transaction. Of course it COULD be criminal activity, but is just assuming it is criminal and accusing them of being scammers appropriate without actual evidence of criminality?

As long as it is clear that what you are purchasing is in no way a legitimate license to operate a Microsoft product or operating system, and may be an ill-gotten good, gained by leveraging hacked accounts and stolen credentials and funds from innocent victims...then maybe you're safe. Deceptively representing what is being sold is worthy of report.

A software audit from Microsoft or the BSA requires invoices and receipts from legitimate resellers for every seat or workstation, and is hard to comply with even if you normally buy shrink-wrapped software. Purchases of grey market goods like "internet keys" in no way provide the proof of purchase required to pass such an audit. A COA hologram sticker alone doesn't provide the proof needed by an actual software audit, and certainly some random key bought on eBay or a dark web site does not either. At most what is being sold is a (temporary) copy-protection bypass mechanism. Representing such keys as an actual license to run software is fraudulent and a negative trust warning is warranted.

Pretty much anything being sold on this site that could be a means to launder and profit from stolen passwords, accounts and credentials, or credit card numbers should be considered as such, without strong evidence to the contrary. The purchaser will likely be the person criminally investigated for the fraudulent use and gain from the purchase. If it walks like a duck...

If a seller says "for sale: stolen Netflix account username/passwords, working until the legitimate owner contacts Netflix or cancels the accounts, or until Netflix contacts the FBI to see who is currently logging in with the hacked account" or "Xbox account purchased with stolen credit card number from data breach, will likely work until credit card theft victim completes chargeback; by purchasing you are contributing to further for-profit criminal enterprise and hacking attempts from our lawless nation-state", then the seller at least is being an honest criminal.

This is a hyperparanoid community, and in digital goods people are especially hesitant, and with good reason. A lot of users will simply see that red mark and move on without even clicking the trust profile. It is unfortunate that people are this superficial, but it is true.

Vod did in his ratings however-

1. Claim criminal activity when there was none
2. Claim the users were scammers, not saying they COULD be scammers. That is a big difference. Mass negatives for this in entirely inappropriate, these should at most have been neutral ratings as a warning to users with no actual customer complaints or other evidence of illicit activity. Bitcoin will never grow by driving legitimate retailers away with harassment over what is nothing more than speculation.

The keys never get blocked by microsoft. Which part of this sentence is which you don't get? IDK about others but I give one key to one person, not 3-5 people like many do just to lower their prices. Not even one person has said that keys were blocked for any god damned reason.

If you're on the default trust list you have the ability to mark someone's account and hurt their forum reputation and future business transactions, a lot more than average members. Giving that you have that sort of ability, you can't just leave feedback "where you see fit" as it will lead to threads like these (whether valid or not will be determined by the evidence provided in each case), and if you don't have evidence or a good probable cause of why the negative feedback was left it ruins the point of the default trust system. Your personal vendetta with someone shouldn't dismay you from the actual facts of whether or not the person should be trusted. Whether you like them or not, you still have to be fair with your ratings. If you aren't then you shouldn't be on the default trust list (or any list for that matter which involves passing judgement onto someone else in a more exclusive manner than others).

It looks like windows will only check the validity of the keys anytime it checks for updates. If one were to turn off any kind of windows updates then their computer would never check the validity of the keys.
Hmmm. I do see that there have been various instances of office deactivating itself. I looked through probably 5 or 6 random results from a google search and I couldn't find any instances where the exact cause was determined, or that the person posting had confirmed (either directly or indirectly) that they were using invalid/stolen keys. I would presume that this could be avoided by disabling automatic updates.

Another very good point is that these keys are being sold for significant discounts. Lets just say for example that the OP's customers did eventually get 'scammed' by your definition and the keys/product stops working after some number of months (I would think it would take at least this long for Microsoft to investigate/act considering how large of a company they are). Lets also say that the price paid is exactly 90.01% off what would otherwise be available to them. The victim could simply buy keys from another seller that is selling at that time for keys that would work for another few months, and then repeat the process another 8 times (for a total of 10 purchases) until they would end up spending more money then they would have spent if they had purchased it via a legit channel. I think it is pretty safe to say that a new version of whatever product they are using prior to them going through this process a total of 10 times, meaning the 'scammed' customer would actually come out on top verses what the result would have been had they paid the full price via legit channels

I think SaltySpitoon put it right.

Conclusions drawn:

1. It's not illegal to sell MSDN keys

2. It's not disallowed by the forum's administrasion

HOWEVER

3. It's against Microsoft's TOS

4. Vod had every right in the world to put these negative trust rating to those people

5. It's up to the people that put him under their trust list to judge if he should be in default trust

My personal comment:

People that sell those keys can disregard Vod's rating. If you serve people right a single rating isn't going to harm you. After all, Vod never accused those sellers saying that they were not actually providing those keys to people that paid them.

This may or may not be the most appropriate place to post this, however I am sure a good number of the MSDN sellers are reading this thread so I will post it here:

I think that it would probably be in most of the seller's best interest to stop selling the keys as they are opening themselves up to significant potential liability if Microsoft were to decide they wanted to make a big deal about this

How do you know this? I would argue that making this statement requires a bit of speculation, similar to the speculation required when saying that people selling netflix accounts are using carded credit cards to pay for them.

It looks like if someone were to purchase a one year MSDN subscription for the operating system license then it would only cost them $700~ while if someone can get the education discount then they can get a good number of product licenses for free.

I am not a seller of these licenses, nor do I have any interest in buying them. My only interest in this is fairness

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/genuine


The sellers are also using stolen/hacked accounts, depleting the resources available for the actual owner.  The sellers have no financial loss when the account is disabled, but the actual owners have paid a considerable amount.

As are you Mr abusive wannabe moderator:


It is not for you to decide who can post where, I will post where I want if I feel it is relevant to the topic being discussed, weather you like it or not. Your bully tactics may have worked on others, but will not work on me.

Do Microsoft products that have MSDN keys periodically check the Microsoft servers to make sure the keys are still valid? If not then how exactly would the products stop working once the keys are revoked?

What would you say if the sellers were to put some kind of disclosure on their sales thread? 

I'm less concerned about the letter of the law here, and more concerned with the fact these guys are selling products that will stop working in the future.

To me, that is a scam.   

I think it is somewhat of a moot point now as shorena has pretty much taken care of it, at least from a EU prospective, which has resulted in me firmly believing that the negative ratings are not appropriate and should not be seen by default. However if you wanted to strengthen your argument, then you could cite US anti-piracy law, and what exactly it prohibits and then analyze what the law prohibits verses what these sellers are doing. If you really wanted to put the nail in the coffin then you could do the same with Canadian law (Vod lives in Canada).

I think what Vod is doing with these sellers is very similar to me giving a negative trust to a competing account seller solely because they are a competitor of mine, or you giving a negative to someone who sells silver only because they sell at lower prices, or Smoothie giving a negative only because they are a competing coin dealer. In any of the above cases, it would be fine if any of the above gave a negative to someone that is actually scamming or attempting to scam (stunna does this all the time with his competition when he finds shady gambling operations - which is appropriate).

While I do agree that Vod has provided a service to the community for spending a lot of time tagging a number of scammers and potential scammers, I do not think this means that he should be held to any less of a high standard to be fair with his ratings.

Why is pointing out that individual jurisdictions do not apply to most of the rest of the world mean I am saying the EU is insignificant? If they banned everything that was illegal in ANY jurisdiction anywhere in the world, there would be NOTHING HERE! The forum rules state that activities are allowed as long as they are legal in both the buyer and the seller's jurisdictions an as well as the jurisdiction under which the forum resides.


Tell me how to reference the nonexistence of a law and I will do so.


Clearly he calls the activity "illegal", which it is not, and additionally he calls it a "scam" which, it may or may not be, and some of these users have been operating for over a year without issue, so this is not accurate either.

Furthermore, these aren't warnings, these are hits to their reputation. A warning would be a neutral comment so that anyone who reviews their feedback can read the potential for abuse. Unfortunately he didn't do that, he just up and decided based on his interaction with one or two key sellers that he should now go around harming the reputations of every single key seller regardless of their actual trading record and satisfaction of customers. VOD is on a power trip and simply enjoys subjugating others as much as possible. None of this was necessary or really demanded by anyone (except those leaving negative ratings).

VOD is on the default trust list and has an increased ability to harm people's reputations. He has demonstrated repeatedly that he is not willing to treat his position with respect and regularly abuses his status to harass others for his own personal satisfaction.

Yet another example of his willingness to abuse his position on the default trust: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10848601

Thanks.


I might, but I dont think I need to. This is mainly about copyright. We are talking about the transfer of a license. Let me quote said directive (Art 6.)


Thats personal preference and hardly relevant here. I have access to Dreamspark keys and I am not even giving them away to friends. There are enough OEM licenses on old laptops or on laptops someone installed linux on. Just ask the next person you see with a sticker[4][5] on their laptop the following two questions and Im certain you will have plenty of perfectly legit microsoft OS keys.

#1 Is this running on linux?
#2 If the answer to #1 is yes: May I buy the Microsoft license that came with the machine for ?

Quote from: Grand_Voyageur on March 22, 2015, 03:13:00 PM

I cannot afford to spend money on lawyers' fees.

I have reason to believe that even if MSDN keys are misused (e.g. private use) and Microsoft had a way to detect this, they have no interest in pursuing legal action.

Quote from: Grand_Voyageur on March 22, 2015, 03:13:00 PM

AFAIK fight on copyrighted software here is still going on;

This is not software piracy. The software is used with a valid license, that was legally optained and transfered. Everything else is pretty much speculation. Yes, the trust system is often used on grounds of speculation, but hardly against someone with a clear trading record for a year.

Quote from: Grand_Voyageur on March 22, 2015, 03:13:00 PM

-snip-
I know this is not yet law, but I put here to try explain why the EU is not insignificant party like TECHSHARE seems to represent.  

Still does not matter. There might be the idea of a law in china which would possibly concern an even bigger part of humanity. Yet, its still an idea and as such no applicable to a single chinese citizen.

Quote from: Grand_Voyageur on March 22, 2015, 03:13:00 PM

However, IMHO being such practice illegal in my jurisdiction i could be justified to give people trading in MSDN Keys a -ve trust feedback.

Im pretty certain I have strong arguements that this is indeed not illegal, but lets say it was. In this case your warning should at least state the region. E.g. This user is selling eggs, which is illegal in antarctica which makes me believe the user is most likely a scammer.
The last part is usually given.

Quote from: SaltySpitoon on March 22, 2015, 03:26:01 PM

I dont know what the problem is, if MSDN keys were illegal, they would be removed from the forum, its just against Microsoft's TOS. So while that isn't for forum moderation to handle, people can do as they wish with the trust system, Vod being on default trust puts him at a higher standard, but again he doesn't misrepresent any claims. As Vod is a Microsoft engineer, would it not make sense that he would be more involved than others?



The feedback he left doesn't misrepresent anything. It looks like a fair warning in my opinion. He doesn't say this guy scammed anyone in particular out of X BTC, he says, Microsoft can trace it back to the original MSDN subscription and invalidate all of the keys. People are still free to purchase the keys, but they should be aware that they could be invalidated.

At the very least he is misusing the word illegaly in order to make his point. I think a rephrasing is in order.



[1] http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/eugh-zu-oracle-vs-usedsoft-gebrauchte-software-darf-verkauft-werden-a-842260.html
[2] http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-07/cp120094de.pdf
[3] Im sorry, but I cant find an english source on these, its EuGH case C-128/11
[4] similar, but prefably not on a Mac: http://realgeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/laptop-stickers/laptop-sticker-nerd.jpg
[5] http://i01.i.aliimg.com/wsphoto/v0/1717672545_4/15sets-lot-Hot-sale-Doodle-Luggage-STICKERS-Laptop-STICKERS-Notebook-Skins-mini-stickers-5-9cm-in.jpg

Well he does say that the selling of the keys from MSDN subscriptions is not allowed. This implies that it is not allowed as per forum rules/the law. You had just mentioned that it is allowed per forum rules and that to your knowledge it is not illegal.

I was previously under the impression that selling these keys is against federal anti-piracy laws, however I have not been able to find anything to back this up to date. I have also been told that it is not against anti-piracy laws (also without reference). So it is really hard to say for sure one way or another if this is in fact against the law.

I also have not seen any concrete evidence as to what exactly happens once the keys are invalidated. If someone had purchased keys to Microsoft Excel for example, will they continue to be able to use it on an existing installation if they do not attempt to pursue any kind of update? (if possible please cite a source if anyone can answer this question).

My biggest concern personally is that there is somewhat of a conflict of interest. As per the quote below, Vod has said that he has a vested financial interest in Microsoft (full disclosure, I also own a moderate amount of MSFT shares personally). These sales obviously do negatively impact Microsoft's bottom line as they are not awarded the opportunity to realize the revenue they would receive from the customers of the people who are selling these keys.


The reason why this was even brought to Vod's attention was that Tomatocage had given negative trust to one of the sellers, which he removed after being told that it was not illegal (refrence).

I dont know what the problem is, if MSDN keys were illegal, they would be removed from the forum, its just against Microsoft's TOS. So while that isn't for forum moderation to handle, people can do as they wish with the trust system, Vod being on default trust puts him at a higher standard, but again he doesn't misrepresent any claims. As Vod is a Microsoft engineer, would it not make sense that he would be more involved than others?



The feedback he left doesn't misrepresent anything. It looks like a fair warning in my opinion. He doesn't say this guy scammed anyone in particular out of X BTC, he says, Microsoft can trace it back to the original MSDN subscription and invalidate all of the keys. People are still free to purchase the keys, but they should be aware that they could be invalidated.

Directive 2009/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the legal protection of computer programs. You should look for the German law that translated the said directive in national law to check the applicable rules in your case as no internal law are exactly the same even if translating the same directive. I'm not too concerned about e.g. CS:GO skins but I'll never put a reselled MS key on my PCs, I'll definitely go to OpenOffice or other open-source software IF I want to save some bucks. I cannot afford to spend money on lawyers' fees.
AFAIK fight on copyrighted software here is still going on; most cases are brought to courts by Guardia di Finanza after being discovered during investigation on financial crime & tax avoidance schemes, but BSA usually take part to court proceedings as a party damaged from the offence.



I know this is not yet law, but I put here to try explain why the EU is not insignificant party like TECHSHARE seems to represent. 


Probably, I would have put a neutral trust to OP as ABitNut did with JudoMS giving them benefit of doubt, at least at first. However, IMHO being such practice illegal in my jurisdiction i could be justified to give people trading in MSDN Keys a -ve trust feedback.

You're very wrong. This is not a threat. I was making an example. I have nothing against you or any forum member currently. I don't think that I've actually ever left someone negative trust. Even if I had, I've removed it. You don't have to take things the wrong way.

That is true indeed. That's where the lack of moderation comes in. The admins have decided who to put on the default trust list.

Id like to see the EU law or directive that make this illegal. Since I am a EU citizen my country (germany) should have a similar law. Yet I know its different with other digital goods, such as steam games. Reselling a steam game is violating their ToS, but it is within my right to do so. I think I would know if this had changed. Besides that, many other accounts or digital items sold here would be illegal under this assumption. This would include and is not limited to everything tradable via steam, e.g. CS:GO skins[1]. A companies rules are just that and any rule a company tries to enforce that is violating laws can be ignored. I have yet to see evidence that reselling MS keys is illegal anywhere. Yes, those keys might get revoked, but as others have already pointed out thats part of the risk to buy these and there has been no reported incident where this happend. AFAIK Microsoft has given up on this fight in the 90's. They are probably happy for the market share these cheap keys give them. Their plans and announcements for Windows 10 indicate this as well. Win10 will most likely be free for home and basic use.




Leaked EU analysis of TTIP IPR negotiations

Nothing you linked is law, TTIP is in the state of secret negotiations and nothing regarding it is currently relevant for anyone. It might get very hairy in the future, but it is not yet time to quote that.


Technically, Vod is on the DefaultTrust list and some of those selling the keys do so for over a year without incident. There is no reason to mark them all as scammers now. I cant see one at least.

[1] see last reply by community mod http://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/1/619568793896191005/

Is that a threat now? Very classy. "I don't understand the drama here!" (proceeds to make threats and create more drama).

I am glad to know you feel it is appropriate to abuse the trust system to harm some ones reputation because you don't like what they said. You would be saying you do not trust me, but it would still clearly be petty, retaliatory, and abusive considering we have never transacted. Tell me again how making the observation that people still want these keys makes me untrustworthy? Of course if you see the trust system as a tool of retribution, using it for punishing people who speak words you don't agree with is ok, that doesn't matter then does it?

This is just another demonstration of how no one has any respect for the trust system any more and simply uses it like a petty system of retribution for disagreeing with them in public. Feel free to join those childish ranks if you so desire. I am sure there will be lots of discussion in a place where everyone is punished for not agreeing with each other. God forbid we examine each case on a case by case basis! That might be too close to some form of justice! We can't have that now.

He does, but remember he is also accountable for his actions for being in default trust.

I do not however understand the drama here. You do realize that I could put negative trust on you, because of this post? With that I'm saying that I don't trust you, and there is nothing wrong with that.
Ironically only people who got negative trust rating complain. I'm not taking a side here, don't get me wrong. But judging from what was written (and I don't know if that's how it goes with msdn keys) he has a point at the first glance. If it is true what he says, then selling there keys is wrong and he's right to give him negative trust.

You think. You do not know, that's the problem. I've been offered stolen keys in the past at similar rates, that's the thing. To judge VOD we'd have to go on a per case basis, which would take forever. Anyhow you're pointing this out often, with a few others that come and go. If the admins see that something is wrong, they will take action. If they don't, there isn't really much you can do about it.

They can never stop it, come on are you serious? Maybe you wanted to say the will never start to accept it but microsoft is not stupid. Bitcoin is not illegal and it will never be illegal.

Bitcoin is tiny - and digital currency - not legal tender, if they are seeing a community working against them (it's not like OP is the only one selling keys) they could stop it. If someone sells it for USD the government behind the USD will force them to stop doing it.

Yeah, of course, he will get a chance. What I meant is he may nor get it removed if he is to continue the trade. I was assuming that part, .

It will if he can follow https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/want-to-get-your-negative-trust-removed-887515.

I don't think that is legal. (Not saying it is illegal)

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

Technically, Vod has the right to put it as long as he believes that such a trade might result in a scam.
Otherwise, you will only consider it a scam only when the scam is done over with? It is a warning, lol. I don't think you will get it removed, IMO.



Edit: The trust feedback was probably given not because of MS Terms, it was given because there are quite good chances that all the keys may be revoked.

Just because someone is selling msdn key for bitcoin doesnt means that bitcoin will be rejected by microsoft, do you think that if someone sells it for USD, then microsoft will be rejecting USD?

I spoke about Italy since I'm based there; however, the Italian law is based on European Directives so i don't think other EU allow such a trade - so, we can safely say such practices are also illegal in other European Union countries as well (total population is roughly 507 million people). As per forum rules, as stated by sirius, here: 1. Trading of goods that are illegal in the seller's or buyer's country is forbidden; so, since such deals are illegal there IF any buyer or seller involved are based there such a trade is not allowed in Marketplace board.

HE COULD DO NOTHING AGAINST RULES IF HE WOULD BE BASED IN FANTASYLAND SINCE NO ONE WOULD CARE ABOUT SUCH COUNTRY MAKING A FUSS OVER IT. EUROPEAN UNION IS NOT SO AVAILABLE TO PASS OVER IT...ALSO BECAUSE OF THE TTIP DEAL (LOOK AT ENFORCEMENT PART HERE) THAT SEEMS TO BE BOUND TO INCLUDE ARMONIZATION OF IP LAWS AND RECOGNITION OF COURTS SENTENCES.

Peace & Love

AFAIK only way for Microsoft to find if a person is using pirated version is by checking whether that ley is being used in one computer more than the number of computers the key should be used(see my above post).


Vod said it may happen and I can't comment on the "refund". That may not be appropriate too but he may have said that in general as this happens a lot here. It is better to change it to "FuckIdolPlus may NOT give you your money back".

Yeah, I guess I'm "crying a sob story for MS"....  maybe, because I want them to keep using Bitcoin and to integrate it globally.

Almost every company integrates Bitcoin for profits only and that's okay - that's the purpose of Bitcoin.

So VOD can see the future now? He KNOWS that the keys will be revoked (even though there are no customers complaining). Also apparently he KNOWS that this user will not reimburse his customers with a replacement or a refund some how. Did some one steal VOD out of the precog tank from minority report?

Only, he is not willing to do this in spite of the fact that it is not illegal.

This has nothing to do with Microsoft accepting bitcoin please drop this off because this is about someone is selling a MSDN key, that is all, so from your point of view if in some country the people use a lot of pirated version of microsoft does that means Microsoft will be unwilling to sell their products to the country?

To OP, this is an issue about ethical, in Most of the countries , a pirated version is actually being use as the "legal" version, vod thinks this is illegal thus according to what cakir found, even Microsoft isnt really care about this pirated version, so if you could present a solid evidence like this , vod will be willing to remove the negative trust

Sory for the 2^nd copy-paste but this is the answer to your statement.


Edit: Second last line might not be appropriate though.

Are you really crying a sob story for Microsoft? REALLY? If you think Microsoft gives two shits about you or Bitcoin, beyond profit motive, you are sorely mistaken.


Yes, yes, it is always insane, of course until it is you personally who have to deal with it. Then it is a travesty that must be corrected. It is way to easy to dismiss people from the sidelines when it has zero direct effect on you. BTW, the rules aren't so clear, especially relating to the trust system. In fact there are no official rules posted anywhere on the forum. This makes it much easier for those in charge to say "do as I say, not as I do", but then unfortunately leaves the rest of the forum guessing as to what is ok and looking to bad examples like VOD for an answer to what is acceptable behavior.

Oh my GOD, another thread about the trust system. This is really insane, I don't think Vod has abused the trust system but his negative trust is not necessary because legality and illegality is an abstract concept here in the forum. We do not know in which jurisdiction is based the seller and ours are only supposition.

However OP you should try to talk with Vod, only he can remove the negative trust and if he abused it then he will be removed from the trust system as few other users.

Good luck with your battle (that was only my personal opinion, and we are in a free forum with right & clear rules).

I have no idea about the legal situation, however I would like to remind OP that Microsoft is the largest company to accept Bitcoin for some of their products and you are not doing them a favour by selling MSDN. I care a lot less about him violating the ToS of companies that are unwilling to integrate Bitcoin.

Just a question for VoD, Even Microsoft doesn't care about cracked Windows versions and lets people to use them.
Latest statement about this: "cracked windows users will get windows 10 upgrade for free": http://www.windowscentral.com/you-can-upgrade-windows-10-free-even-if-youre-using-pirated-version-windows

Why do you care about people's selling Msdn keys?

Yes, it's unethical, wrong, maybe illegal but even Microsoft doesn't care, why do you?

Also people may just crack and use it for free (with viruses of course), And this may cause bitcoin theft...

Is "some jurisdictions" such as Italy the entire world? Is the seller based in one of these countries? Is the forum hosted in one of those countries? Are customers from those countries even trading with him? No? You don't know? In that case NOTHING HE IS DOING IS AGAINST THE FORUM RULES. In the VAST MAJORITY of the world this is NOT A CRIME but simply a violation of the terms of service. This forum is shifting from anarcho-capitalist to fascist pretty quickly now entering into the realm of telling people what they can and can't do with completely arbitrary moral justifications. Before you know it VOD will be personally enforcing AML and KYC regulations on the forum, and anyone who doesn't comply is a DIRTY SCAMMER!

It's a trust system not a "rate my service" system - you have every right to trust or distrust any person.

Of course, if you distrust people they will probably distrust you as well. I'm not using the trust system here, but I also see the need to act against questionable sales (including MSDN).

I don't left you a -ve trust feedback myself, since i didn't notice early your thread; however, I have to correct you since in some jurisdiction - like e.g. Italy - buying & selling w/o COAs and/or using SWs with such Keys on computers is illegal and dealt with huge administrative fines; however, often in some bigger cases, a felony charge is brought to courts.

Sure sounds like VOD to me.

ABitNut is the person who started the word that selling MSDN is illegal and what not. He ignited the fire and VOD became the gust of wind, spreading it.

Yes, we are doing this again. How many times will his "service" to the community be used as an excuse for his abusive behavior? Amazing how this is never a problem for Tomatocage but with VOD it is a recurring theme. He is in fact abusing his position on the default trust. He is lying claiming selling the keys is illegal, it is not. At worst it is a violation of the terms of service, NOT a criminal act. VOD simply evoked the issue of criminality in the hopes that the staff would do his extortion work for him and simply ban all the sellers for "illegal" activity.

Are there angry customers lined up complaining? No.
Is it a crime to sell them? No.

So who made VOD the moral arbiter Bitcointalk precrime sheriff?

If it is not against the forum rules, and there are no victims, what exactly is his justification for leaving negative trust ratings for any key seller he can find? Because someone could possibly maybe potentially lose their validation in the distant future? I think people paying a fraction of the retail price for these keys realize the reason the price is reduced is the increased risk of potential deactivation, and are perfectly willing to transact anyway. VOD is on the default trust list, and people on the default trust list DO IN FACT have their trust ratings moderated. As some one on the default trust, he has extra power to destroy people's reputations, and along with that comes more stringent standards for his own use of the trust system.

To me his -ve trust feedback to OP look legit & correct since he seems to strongly believe FuckIdolPlus his a scammer. If Vod wasn't strongly convinced of it, It would have left a neutral feedback to him or no feedback at all.


However, after looking at OP trust feedback page, I found another member - ABitNut (uid: 331100) - who left him referenced -ve trust feedback over similar trades.


If OP cares over -ve trust feedback he should politely ask Vod & ABitNut to revise their feedbacks.

Are we going to do this again? People, uh.
No he is not abusing anything. This being legal or not, he has the right to leave negative feedback if he sees it fit. He's actually one of the rare members that helps identify scammers and whatnot.

Theymos nor anyone from the stuff does not moderate the trust system. If you've sent him a PM because of this, no wonder that you got no reply. Anyhow when sending him a message, it takes a long time for a reply to come, if ever.

It will be only fair for Vod if he will now give red trust to every other Microsoft's dealer or resellers of other services and accounts. It would be fair.
But I'm afraid this way if he really would do this, we will have half of the marketplace marked with red trust.

This user left negative feedback to every MSDN seller just because he think's selling MSDN key is illegal and somehow in his dictionary is a 'scam'.
He then offered me to stop selling so he would remove the negative trust.



And the following was my reply to him :


But he is not acknowledging any of it. He is saying I have promised to leave selling MSDN. And then starts saying I lied by still selling keys.

If this goes on the marketplace will be dead eventually.

I want his trust to be removed from everyone's accounts, or everyone selling Netflix, etc. as mentioned in my reply must be told to stop selling too.
The reason is MSDN is legal selling where as the type sellers in my reply are selling stolen accounts, gift cards and this counts as credit card fraud.

I hope theymos you read this because you clearly ignored my PM 1-2 days ago.