Pages:
Author

Topic: [Wallets Stolen By Hackers][We're Sorry][Contact Anon136 For Escrow] - page 2. (Read 77072 times)

full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100

I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low.

Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security.
You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee).

You might consider adjusting your terms.


I never said It's a mandatory requirement, you can check my other IPO's Most investors didn't sent any keys to me, If it's hard use can send funds and ask escrow provider about it. But I will sure remove that requirement from future escrow upon one condition which is, if user wants refund he need to prove that he sent those funds from his wallet.

Most escrow providers encourage users to send funds from their own wallet due to security and for refund process. (Ie: If some investors account got hacked, he can simply ask escrow provide to give refund on different address)

In this IPO,I think main issue was fees.. (Anon136, please don't mind) which was..

My fees are 0.02BTC or 0.9% which ever is greater and it will be taken off the top when ever i release or refund those coins.

If some investor wants to send 0.1 btc, 0.02 BTC is too much.
https://blockchain.info/address/1KFtdiVELBcaVtaueqf8RJBkoZnjHbshKA

Better to risk a little money rather than a lot
legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217

I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low.

Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security.
You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee).

You might consider adjusting your terms.


I never said It's a mandatory requirement, you can check my other IPO's Most investors didn't sent any keys to me, If it's hard use can send funds and ask escrow provider about it. But I will sure remove that requirement from future escrow upon one condition which is, if user wants refund he need to prove that he sent those funds from his wallet.

Most escrow providers encourage users to send funds from their own wallet due to security and for refund process. (Ie: If some investors account got hacked, he can simply ask escrow provide to give refund on different address)

In this IPO,I think main issue was fees.. (Anon136, please don't mind) which was..

My fees are 0.02BTC or 0.9% which ever is greater and it will be taken off the top when ever i release or refund those coins.

If some investor wants to send 0.1 btc, 0.02 BTC is too much.
https://blockchain.info/address/1KFtdiVELBcaVtaueqf8RJBkoZnjHbshKA

That's how much I value my time. The amount they send doesn't effect the amount of time it takes to process their order and handle the necessary customer service and it doesn't change how much I value my time.
legendary
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1004

I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low.

Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security.
You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee).

You might consider adjusting your terms.


I never said It's a mandatory requirement, you can check my other IPO's Most investors didn't sent any keys to me, If it's hard use can send funds and ask escrow provider about it. But I will sure remove that requirement from future escrow upon one condition which is, if user wants refund he need to prove that he sent those funds from his wallet.

Most escrow providers encourage users to send funds from their own wallet due to security and for refund process. (Ie: If some investors account got hacked, he can simply ask escrow provide to give refund on different address)

In this IPO,I think main issue was fees.. (Anon136, please don't mind) which was..

My fees are 0.02BTC or 0.9% which ever is greater and it will be taken off the top when ever i release or refund those coins.

If some investor wants to send 0.1 btc, 0.02 BTC is too much.
https://blockchain.info/address/1KFtdiVELBcaVtaueqf8RJBkoZnjHbshKA
legendary
Activity: 1876
Merit: 1014
So why did some people not use escrow? What was the reason for it?

Escrow fees.

How much it was btw?  1% right?
5$ to keep 500$ safe is not bad at all and I'm not sure why investors were paying escrow fees, they should have demanded escrow service from dev on his own expense.

In H2O Coin's IPO Dev paid escrow fees.

i think ppl just be lazy and not familiar with escrow.

I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low.

Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security.
You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee).

You might consider adjusting your terms.


The next potential scam we have is Alter Ego Coin.... who is fond of saying "if you want escrow, then you go ahead"  and other such red herrings when asked proper questions. I've been "trolling" their thread for a few days now Tongue

Nice one. I'll warn some people as well Smiley

It was a scam as well. Well spotted!
legendary
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1217
So why did some people not use escrow? What was the reason for it?

Escrow fees.

How much it was btw?  1% right?
5$ to keep 500$ safe is not bad at all and I'm not sure why investors were paying escrow fees, they should have demanded escrow service from dev on his own expense.

In H2O Coin's IPO Dev paid escrow fees.

i think ppl just be lazy and not familiar with escrow.

I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low.

Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security.
You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee).

You might consider adjusting your terms.


its not that. thats not why i personally require people to have their private keys. i do it because it allows me to use the blockchain its self for all of my accounting and thus cuts my workload atleast in half. that allows me to offer lower prices and services more customers in total.
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
Vires in Numeris
I really think the best thing to do is to invest on something true when it's live, like Nemcoin. Or even ethereum. Stop gambling in these iffy coins.

But if we didn't gamble on iffy coins, how would we become NXT millionaires?
full member
Activity: 270
Merit: 103
I really think the best thing to do is to invest on something true when it's live, like Nemcoin. Or even ethereum. Stop gambling in these iffy coins.
legendary
Activity: 1876
Merit: 1014
So why did some people not use escrow? What was the reason for it?

Escrow fees.

How much it was btw?  1% right?
5$ to keep 500$ safe is not bad at all and I'm not sure why investors were paying escrow fees, they should have demanded escrow service from dev on his own expense.

In H2O Coin's IPO Dev paid escrow fees.

i think ppl just be lazy and not familiar with escrow.

I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low.

Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security.
You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee).

You might consider adjusting your terms.


The next potential scam we have is Alter Ego Coin.... who is fond of saying "if you want escrow, then you go ahead"  and other such red herrings when asked proper questions. I've been "trolling" their thread for a few days now Tongue

Nice one. I'll warn some people as well Smiley
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
So why did some people not use escrow? What was the reason for it?

Escrow fees.

How much it was btw?  1% right?
5$ to keep 500$ safe is not bad at all and I'm not sure why investors were paying escrow fees, they should have demanded escrow service from dev on his own expense.

In H2O Coin's IPO Dev paid escrow fees.

i think ppl just be lazy and not familiar with escrow.

I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low.

Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security.
You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee).

You might consider adjusting your terms.


The next potential scam we have is Alter Ego Coin.... who is fond of saying "if you want escrow, then you go ahead"  and other such red herrings when asked proper questions. I've been "trolling" their thread for a few days now Tongue
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
I trust u.

We are the same. I think no body will believe u again.But keep going.

Aren't you that scammer who stole everyone's money by running that pool?
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
Vires in Numeris
Why you guys don't contact theymos and ask both dev's IP history and seriously no one tried to check if their name and number is correct or not?

Copy of OP is here
https://bitcointa.lk/threads/pos-edgecoin-marketplace-gambling-advanced-wallet-ipo-stage-2-20-days.289952/

That's what I was thinking. Easy for a mod to give out the IP address's of the account. If indeed there is an FBI investigation then will want this information.

I've contacted the admins before about previous scams and they are unwilling to do anything about it.

The funny thing is because they are allowing these scams to happen they are partly liable and could be sued in a court of law. All though not aiding and abetting a criminal act they are willfully ignoring crimes which can put them in some hot water if enough people group together to form a class-action lawsuit (which in my opinion they should).

heres an excerpt from http://www.ericgoldman.org/writings/websiteliabilityalert.htm on website liability :
Quote
4.         Other Claims. Until the scope of the Communications Decency Act’s safe harbor is more fully understood, the range of potential claims against websites is impossible to define. If the safe harbor defense is not available, websites will need to develop other defenses, if they can, against claims for user-caused harms and attendant claims that the website knew of the harm and failed to take reasonable actions to prevent or remedy the harm.

I'd like to start a petition soon but I'm still compiling data. If I can get everyones support I believe we can make this community a better place by imposing a set of community regulations that we can all agree on (like mandatory escrow, no self-moderated ANN threads, etc).

The first step will be to organize all the data of the most recent scams, how many people were scammed, how much money, etc.
Then create a thread explaining the situation, what we want to do about it, and put it to a vote.

If we can steer everyone to that thread and vote we might be able to force some positive change.

Can I get a show of support of how many would consider signing a petition/vote?
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
Vires in Numeris
So why did some people not use escrow? What was the reason for it?

Escrow fees.

How much it was btw?  1% right?
5$ to keep 500$ safe is not bad at all and I'm not sure why investors were paying escrow fees, they should have demanded escrow service from dev on his own expense.

In H2O Coin's IPO Dev paid escrow fees.

i think ppl just be lazy and not familiar with escrow.

I will have to agree. Anon and escrow.ms you might be turning some people away with your requiring private keys. Some people are noobs and don't understand how things work. It's also a moot point, because we are not talking about shitloads of money per person here. So the chances of someone hacking their bitcointalk account just for that .1 to 2 BTC is rather low.

Requiring a PM with the tx id and a receiving wallet address should be more than enough security.
You could also let people opt-in to withdrawal only by private key proof. That way those who are investing more can choose a hightened security (and pay a higher fee).

You might consider adjusting your terms.
full member
Activity: 300
Merit: 103
I trust u.

We are the same. I think no body will believe u again.But keep going.
legendary
Activity: 1876
Merit: 1014
I think the guy who put in a 5BTC investment without escrow is more of an idiot

Could easily be the guy himself of course Smiley
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
I think the guy who put in a 5BTC investment without escrow is more of an idiot
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100

If hackers really stole the wallet, do you think they would leave the money in there untouched? lol. They would transfer it out immediately in case the original owner had a wallet backup.
legendary
Activity: 1876
Merit: 1014
full member
Activity: 133
Merit: 100
Some people through guarantees, BTC returned to you
Pages:
Jump to: