Quote from: jonald_fyookball on September 13, 2015, 02:05:21 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on September 13, 2015, 07:13:11 AM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on September 13, 2015, 06:41:09 AM

Quote from: Quickseller on September 13, 2015, 06:19:50 AM

Quote from: TheButterZone on September 13, 2015, 04:36:42 AM

@TBZ - I am sorry if my actions are something that you do not approve of. I repeat this same statement to anyone else who does not approve of my actions. I am not going to repeat my arguments as to why I believe that escrowing for yourself is okay because I have echo'ed them many times across multiple threads and for the most part they have mostly been ignored. There have also been no logical and/or factual arguments that counter any of my arguments, but rather nothing but trolls, scammers and shit posters who in no way address my arguments.

At the end of the day, what I did was a result of my witnessing of similar activity by one of the most, if not the most trusted and respected member of the community doing what was essentially the exact same thing out in the open and without consequence. I had posted in the thread where this was happening out in the open multiple times, so it is difficult to say that I was unaware of the situation.

If there are no rules regarding how people can and cannot conduct their own business, then how can you argue that someone who is conducting business in similar ways to one of the most trusted people in the community in the open months after he had done so is in the wrong?

Escrowing for yourself isn't okay because by definition an escrow is a neutral third party.
It's been logically explained to you by numerous people. TC isn't right for doing it either
but he's not going on trying to justify it.

The more you argue it, the more I'm tempted to leave negative feedback. I haven't done so thus
far because I thought the offense was minor and DT removal was good enough, but your attitude
makes me not trust your judgement.

Okay, if you and/or the community thinks that self escrowing is not okay, then why was there no outcry when it happened months ago? New users should know that asking for a loan without collateral is not okay because a) there is a sticky warning advising not to request such loans and b) because it happens often and the public result is that the new users receive negative ratings. On the other hand, escrowing for ones self happens out in the open with zero public outcry (there is more then one person engaging in this practice, however I am not going to call anyone out on this for obvious reasons).

Furthermore, if the appropriate disclosures are made (as I have since done), then whose business is it to say that others are not able to engage in a consensual transaction, that in reality, is going to overwhelmingly result in all parties involved saying they are happy with the transaction. This is exactly what a free market is, the ability for market participants to be able to make informed decisions as to how and what they wish to trade.

It's not consensual when there is deception involved. no one cares when self escrowing is disclosed, but they do when it's not, which is what you've been doing.

Pretty simple, dude.

Since I don't think you are stupid, I can only conclude you're unable to stop yourself from trying to rationalize your behavior and you're unwilling to just admit you're not right.

Let me give you an analogy and you can try to explain how your situation is any different.

Alice owns a small private airplane and hires Bob, an airplane engine mechanic to perform maintenance.
Afterward, Alice decides it would be prudent to have a second mechanic just double check the engine. She hired Charlie, but it's really Bob who has a disguise and a fake mustache.

Alice flies her plane, it works fine, no one gets hurt. Bob points to this fact to rationalize his behavior.
But his friend David is giving him flak for the deception, so Bob decides not to cash the second check made to Charlie. Now he really feels good because no one got hurt and he never double charged Alice.

But what he's missing is that he deceived Alice, deprived her of the benefit of lower risk, and justified it all by pointing that he had done the job correctly. Using insanely twisted logic, he says: "well if I didn't know what I was doing, the plane would have gone down, but that would have happened the same if she didn't hire a second mechanic to double check, or if I did the checking myself."

so, how is what you did any different than "Bob"?

Still waiting for QS to answer this.