Quote from: yahoo62278 on January 25, 2019, 07:42:41 PM

The forum has never had a policy against account sales. It has always stated sales are discouraged. Account sales were tolerated til 2015/maybe early 2016 from members here.

Then the tags started flying. My question is, these guys most likely know account sales are discouraged against. They also both have seen multiple accounts be tagged for the same activity, yet they kept taking accounts as collateral.

Now they have been caught, but as long as they say they'll stop, it's ok? How is that fair to anyone else who has been tagged for the same practice?

I could be ok with account sales if certain things were done, but I know users who are selling accounts will not comply with what I would want to happen as the value of the account would probably drop.

If users are going to accept accounts as collateral, then make everything public. Take steps to message users and have the positive trust removed from an account they are selling. Tag the account with a neutral tag as well stating in fact the account was bought and sold and the user who now owns the account is not the old owner, and state who owns the account.

Who's gonna do that though? Not a soul because it centralizes the sales and takes away from the anonymity of the situation.

I agree that some users who are selling accounts are probably awesome for the forum but it's a double standard to allow them a pass and not everyone else period. If you started tagging users for account sales once the community decided its not ok, then your opinion should not be any different based on the user really. They know what they are doing is not acceptable to the community and choose to do it anyways

I fucking need some sMerits to merit you. But I fucking don't have any left. Feel bad.

Check the statements in the bold. When you are tagging an account seller and account buyer then you are creating your own rules. "Discouraged" should not mean that tag the account.

When you tag an account you basically destroy everything.

Consider this case: grtthegreat is not a bad guy to tag him just because he needed to sell the collateral to liquidated his capital.

Every forum member has their own value for their own account.

My account has 4 DT red trust but that does not mean that my account does not have a value for me. If I need a loan and if anyone accept my account as collateral (for the sake of argue by the way) I will never walk away with the money. I will do whatever it takes to get my account back. Coz this is my identity I can not sell it.

Consider the account of yahoo (for example mate). If he needs a loan and he offers his account as collateral then anyone will accept it coz they knows yahoo values his account. He will do anything to take his account back. Now what if he don't pay back and default the loan. You go and tag the lender if he wants to sell it and also tag yahoo's account because it will be bought account?

When a lender takes an account as collateral - they don't expect the borrower to default the loan. They think plain and simple that the borrower will pay the loan back and take their account back. But when they don't then what do you expect? The lender face the consequence just because he was nice to someone.

Value the good side of people.

Quote from: grtthegreat on January 25, 2019, 08:01:05 PM

3. Regarding the ponzi, the thread is almost 5 years old, it was back in my very early days to bitcoin, and I do agree that it was quite a dick move.

People do things which they don't like and ashamed of. There are no shame in it. No one is clean 100%. Your 5 years old event were bought here so that the claim get some support which I explained here. OP did not allow me to post it here.