Re: Quickseller, trust abuse, innacurate negative ratings, unprofesional escrow...

The fact that quickseller sells accounts which often go to scammers and two, that he quickseller is less than a year old on this forum truly AND has been abusing trust obviously for awhile with many complaints leads me to believe he should not be on default trust.

Who in the world gave a <1 year old person on this site DEFAULT TRUST? I mean Vod, that guy has been around for many years, OK. But a <1 year account with many instances of unethicalness including acting under multiple accounts to obtain information as seen in this thread, using his "tips" to promote his own business and then claiming one who calls him out as unethical as a scammer and THREE, spends his life on this forum while receiving numerous complaints.

This guy is worst than Vod, I mean just look at all the complaints about this guy. Seriously, a guy around for less than one year, sketchy as best, and on default trust...does no one see a problem with that?

There is no rule here telling the account should be 1 year old to be in default trust list and complaints about him are mostly scammers. *Valid* complaints are necessary for removing him from default trust list.

How do you know they "are mostly scammers"? From what I've seen in this thread wohiper_-_ did no business with QS, but merely decided not to do business, got neg reppped? How is that invalid? In my own case, QS went after me based on some sort of personal animus---trolling me in several threads with multiple accounts and using the word of a known scammer as "proof". It's patently ridiculous. My complaint is also valid. MZ, you will be singing a different song when he goes after you.

Yes "mostly" but "not all". worhiper has an exception in this and you, I have more to clarify about it. I don't believe you are an untrustworthy person but your behaviour in the old case is scammy. Well, so far QS hasn't come after me. So I can't tell how I will be. Let's see what happens if such a thing happens...

Okay, leaving aside the fact that you know nothing about my "behavior" in the old case other than that I deny the charges that TF left for me, what about the fact that QS's motivation in attacking me was personal and vindictive? Is this somehow "invalid"? Here you have two cases where you say "okay these guys have an exception, QS seems to be abusing them", then you have to ask why is it okay for him to do so in these cases. How many cases have to be built up before something will be done?

No, I didn't said "okay these guys have an exception, QS seems to be abusing them". I said ypu and worhiper have an exception in people who I referred in "mostly".

Quote from: tspacepilot on May 18, 2015, 03:36:03 PM

Quote

Quote from: tspacepilot on May 18, 2015, 01:37:11 PM

Quote from: Vod

Why don't you do something about it? Threaten to break his legs or something? Roll Eyes

How is this in any way constructive, Vod? You keep giving snarky replies here to this or that, but have you actually weighed in on the situation described by the OP?

He said to kill Vod or something. I think it is something related to that comment.

I must have missed that. Still, I wish Vod would comment on the situation in the OP. He's here and reading the thread but I haven't found anything where he supports or complains about QS's actions against worhiper_-_. Maybe there's an unspoken thing where people on default trust don't complain about each other publically, IDK.