Quote from: Quickseller on September 13, 2015, 12:19:26 AM

Quote from: TheButterZone on September 12, 2015, 05:28:13 AM

WTF?

I'm going to need a PGP-clearsigned YES or NO answer, from Quickseller, to the following question:
Did you, Quickseller, engage in 1 or more trades where any party other than you was led to believe that there were 3 parties with 3 different DNA profiles involved in the trade (1-buyer, 2-seller 3-escrow agent), but in reality there were only 2?

YES or NO?

Did I lead anyone to believe that a trade I was acting as escrow[1] for had 3 distinct DNA profiles[2]? No. Any trade that I acted as a middle man (or as some like to say "escrow"), no explicit, nor implicit statement was made by myself saying that I was not a party to the trade. Any agreement that I had sent out said something along the lines that party (b) should send a certain amount of money to a particular BTC address, once party (s) saw that such an amount was sent to that address they should send a certain amount of money and/or goods and/or services to party (b), and once party (b) is in receipt of the above mentioned currency and/or goods and/or services they should authorize the release of the funds being held to party (s) who would then receive a certain amount of BTC to the address of their choice; and in the event of a dispute I would attempt to mediate such dispute, and if it would not be abundantly clear as to what a fair resolution would be then a scam accusation would be opened to consult the overall community. Nowhere was the words "3rd" (except for potentially the date or similar), or "neutral" were used.

[1]According to the link you provided one definition of "escrow" is:

Quote

[MASS NOUN] The state of being kept in custody or trust until a specified condition has been fulfilled:

Funds were kept in my custody of a specific BTC address until at least when specified conditions were fufilled

You failed on multiple levels (moral, ethical, legal, common sense, etc.), not the least of which was answering my binary question with a binary answer.

"or as some like to say "escrow""
You yourself use the term escrow in your Personal Text:
"Safe and professional escrow goo.gl/ZI2m0Q"

But if we're going to use your second term "middle man", regardless of whether restitution was made, fraud occurred if 1 out of 2 exclusive parties pretended to be a middleman.

Quote from: https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/middleman

A person who arranges business or political deals between other people.

You are not simultaneously yourself and an other person.

Quote from: https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/custody

The protective care or guardianship of someone or something: the property was placed in the custody of a trustee

Quote from: https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/trustee

Law An individual person or member of a board given control or powers of administration of property in trust with a legal obligation to administer it solely for the purposes specified: pension fund trustees

You are not simultaneously yourself and an individual person other than yourself.

Quote from: Quickseller, cont.

[2]I have no idea what the DNA profiles were of any of the people I traded with, nor any of the people that I was acting as a middle man/escrow for. As I never requested, nor received their DNA profiles, and although unlikely, it is possible that a trade I engaged in only involved one DNA profile (I have no reason to believe this to be the case however).

The context you were replying to in the above quote included YOU in the 3 distinct DNA profiles of a 3 party trade. So the only possible way for "a trade {you} engaged in only involved one DNA profile" is that you either dealt with your multiple personalities (in the psychological sense, not the alt username sense), or you were dealing with AIs (that had no human involvement other than the initial coding which had nothing to with trading, prior to the AI's self-evolution into being able to trade), or your multiple personality & AI. Oh, and it's also "possible" those who have an identical DNA profile as you.

STOP DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE.