Quote from: Quickseller on September 08, 2015, 06:38:13 AM

Quote from: BadBear on September 08, 2015, 06:06:47 AM

Escrowing for yourself...on the one hand if someone is using Quickseller as an escrow, then they are using him because they trust him, or at the very least because they think his reputation is worth more than what they are trading. Him being part of the trade doesn't change that, and it still provides the peace of mind that an escrow can provide.

On the other hand, an escrow is supposed to be an impartial mediator in the event of disputes, which would be very difficult to do when being part of the trade. Even if he knew or thought he wouldn't do anything wrong in the process of the transaction, disputes can still arise when neither party has done anything wrong. That and taking additional fees isn't really the right thing to do. It's probably something one should avoid.

If you and I are doing a direct trade, and I send money directly to you (without escrow), and the goods never arrive to my address, and you are unable to provide any kind of proof that you sent the items, don't you think it would be expected of you to return such money (and learn your lesson to next time keep better documentation)?

I can't speak for anyone else, however if I was selling something to someone and a similar to the above situation were to occur (including others that I may not have been described but would still be my fault), then I would certainly refund the buyer. I can even say that a situation similar to this even occurred that resulted in a partial refund to someone I sold a miner to (you can check my trusted feedback).

If I am able to act this way in a direct trade, then why would I not be able to act this way when acting as an escrow?

edit: see my previous post regarding the fee

I can handle reports related to my posts. I have a vast and very complete knowledge of forum rules and policies, precedents related to them, and am probably best equipped to do it. But I don't, because there would be an inherent bias and conflict of interest, whether I see it or not. It's just the proper way to do it, and helps to put others at ease (though odds are nobody would ever know). Everyone is biased to some extent, it's best to minimize it as much as possible. If for nothing else, than for public perception.

Quote from: Quickseller on September 08, 2015, 07:43:20 AM

There is apparently a 13 page thread about a "probable alt" of quicklseller.

Indeed. Edited my post to clarify.

Quote

With all that being said, do you think that the "ends might justify the means" in this situation? Maybe such deception was to avoid a situation that would result in a scam that is discovered be endorsed because of a (successful) extortion attempt.

Additionally, such no deception resulted in not (attempted or actual) financial gain (see above RE: the escrow fee).

I think it is probably fair to say, that if either you, theymos, or TC were to accidentally leak what could result in their/your personal information being disclosed, that any of you would take steps to prevent such information from appearing credible.

I can say with great certainty that you absolutely do not want your personal information disclosed to the public

You can do what you want, but you brought me into it, and I can't risk my reputation and the trust I've built up over the years. Being trustworthy, credible, and reliable as an admin is too important, more than any one person, including me (as a person). With that in mind, no the ends don't justify the means, I wouldn't lie to cover up my personal information either.

Whether the deception resulted in monetary gain is irrelevant. It's the betrayal of trust that matters. It's very hard to gain that back once it's lost, if not impossible.

Like I said, I'm sorry about the situation your in, but it's a situation of your own making. Tangled web, deceit, etc.