Can you provide any kind of evidence I'm an AMhash sympathizer? I haven't owned a crypto share of anything since before GLBSE shut down. There's a great number of cloud mining Ponzis out there that I haven't given negative feedback to and some that I have, though it has nothing to do with trying to paint every possible Ponzi. When I left my feedback for PBmining and TeraBox, they still had neutral trust.
It's similar to my rating for blackarrow, AMT and hashcoins. All of those outfits had neutral (or positive in the case of BA) trust that shouldn't, so I provided my opinion of their legitimacy. I haven't posted negative trust for BFL or EMIC or MAT because those have been more than covered already.
If TeraBox can prove something resembling legitimacy I'd have no problem removing my trust rating on them. This probably has little to do with specific problems with my trust rating for TeraBox though, and more with you being pissed off that my involvement with PBmining meant you couldn't keep whoring your PBmining referral links around trying to bring new people into the scam.
If I remember correctly, you were wearing the signature of AM hash or AsicMiner or some of the friedcat led cloud mining eyewash game product a few days ago which are directly competing businesses like TeraBox.
Whom do you think of yourself that company should prove their legitimacy to you ? You ofcourse do have the right to leave -ve feedback on anyone you think is untrustworthy, just like I have the right to think that friedcat is playing a legitimacy game by remaining anonymous. But, if you can not publicly back up your claim with proof (I mean proof from you, not the person/company who is accused), then you DO NOT have the right to be associated with DefaultTrust. For any cloud mining company, your -ve is a conflict of interest.The case of MrTeal is exactly the same as of Mabshark and MrTeal is again in the trust list of friedcat product's group buy leader CanaryInTheMine. We do not need another round of logic and explanation to prove the case of MrTeal. Either MrTeal be removed from trust list of CanaryInTheMine or
CanaryInTheMine be demoted to depth 2 of DefaultTrust, so that the friedcat army can not create problem for upcoming cloud mining companies.
You don't remember correctly. I haven't even had a signature in the last year. I've never owned an AM share (though I almost did get some in the IPO and was kicking myself that I didn't), nor have I purchased any AMHash. I had no account on Hashie or Havelock to buy or sell AM shares at all.
My being added to Canary's trust list had nothing to do with AM or Friedcat. He sent me almost 6 figures worth of non-AM product up front without escrow; I paid him for them at the prescribed time in full. Hence, trust added.
Again, you don't need another round of logic because every premise of your argument is false. I don't imagine I'll see an apology out of this as well when TeraBox goes tits up, but maybe you'll pleasantly surprise me.
You skillfully skipped my actual Q. So, magnified for U.
Out of all the people that you are calling AMHash sympathisers (MrTeal, Puppet, Raskul and I), I am the only one who has ever had an AM signature. Raskul has a Spondoolies (a competitor of AM) signature and is a massive Spondoolies fan. Puppet isn't a fan of mining at all and advocates buying and holding, and MrTeal just told you his story.
How many times do you need be told that before it sinks in?
Mabshark => AM hash
MrTeal => Asic Miner
Raskul => Spondoolies Tech
Jimmothy => HaveLock
Puppet => HaveLock
CanaryInTheMine => Anything friedcat goes fine with him.
All of the above has conflict of interest with direct selling cloud mining companies.
You're free to your opinion that I'm now an Asicminer shill and that's a conflict of interest, though it's wrong. I'm not even sure how you somehow backed off me being an AMHash shill to now being an Asic Miner shill; it seems like it'd be a pretty inconsequential difference. I assume it's because I wish I'd gotten in on the IPO at 0.1 when it jumped to 4BTC/share 8 months later, but that's a similar logic jump to saying I'm a shill for the lottery company for wishing I'd picked the right PowerBall numbers even though I don't buy lottery tickets. Your opinion though, as you say.
As for leaving negative feedback for TeraBox, I cannot prove they are a ponzi, that is true. They display all the classic signs of a Ponzi though, in the same way that PBmining did. I couldn't prove PBmining was a Ponzi either (a fact you and all your Ponzi sympathizers seemed to love stating before PBmining blew up), but that didn't change the fact it was one. Is there a chance that TeraBox isn't a Ponzi? Probably. They could be a legitimate cloud mining company masquerading as a Ponzi. As I've said before, I would have no problem removing the feedback is TeraBox contacted me or provided any shred of evidence that they aren't a scam. Until then, much like Tomatocage tagging likely loan scammers, I will use my discretion to tag a company this is almost certainly going to default on their contracts. Since my leaving feedback for them isn't a conflict of interest as I have no stake in any cloud mining, my lack of right to be associated with default trust is simply your misguided opinion. I don't do it for you though, I do it for guys like this.
I am glad that i came here 1st, i was going to join Terabox, i will buy own miner other than cloud mining now, i have lost with others to scared to take them chances
Now a question for you, do you have any shares in Terabox, have you taken one of their free vouchers, and/or have you advertised a referral link to them or received any referral hashing power?