I don't, either. However that should be discussed in the tsp vs. QS thread in Meta, not here.

We don't know why... but he did have the time to make a post from 'his alt account' QS banned and it seems he can't make a post from his main account.





https://archive.is/vK8SB

QS wants everyone to think Panthers52 is his alt

I frankly don't get it. What is the QS drama about?

Edit: LOL. QS very likely is.

I think it is. Especially if a fee was involved and the other party is kept in the dark.

The first poster has absolutely no ethics nor morals. He has stolen money from at least one website, and is advertising another casino that is clearly a scam. He does not care about warning others, in fact he is strongly against the warning of others about potential scams.

The purpose of the first poster creating this thread is to sling QS and myself's reputation through the mud because QS had called him out as a thief and because I had disagreed with him. This is not the first time that TSP has claimed that users who disagree with him are an alt of someone calling him a scammer, but you do not need to take my word for it, you only need to take a look at this thread, more specifically, look at TSP's reaction when someone agreed with $username. What did TSP do? He claimed the persons agreeing with $username was one of $username's sock-puppets.

One of the users who correctly said that TSP is a scammer is bitcointalk.org moderator Mitchell. Over a year later TSP started using a sock-puppet account to pressure Mitchell to take down a paid advertisement on a thread that he was spending a portion of his limited and valuable time maintaining. Here is an example where TSP was being especially an asshole to Mitchell:
@TSP - Can you explain your months-long harassing behavior towards Mitchell as being anything other then retaliation for Mitchell agreeing that you are a scammer? If this cannot be properly address, or is ignored, then the preponderance of evidence will show that TSP harassed Mitchell for months in retaliation for calling him a scammer.


The reason TSP does not like QS is not as clear cut as it initially appears. QS had purchased advertising from Mitchell several times, and this was advertising revenue that TSP did not want Mitchell to have. TSP even went as far to start to troll QS in a signature campaign that QS was acting as escrow for.

The above might seem like a reasonable inquiry upon an initial review, however there are two points that should be made:
#1) TSP was not participating in that paid signature campaign, and this fact means that he really does not have standing to question how the escrow is working. If this was the only issue, I would give him a pass, but it is not.
#2) The escrow that TSP had started participating in prior to making the above inquiry used a similar PGP signed message to confirm the receipt of funds (except this PGP signed message did not even control an address in which he was holding funds):
@TSP - Why exactly were you trolling QS about signing a message from a bitcoin address he was holding funds in for a signature campaign when the escrow for your very own signature campaign was holding funds in the exact same way? Was this because QS had done business with Mitchell in the past who had previously called you a scammer? If you cannot address this issue, or if you ignore this issue then the preponderance of evidence will show that you chose to harass QS because he did business with someone you did not like, and was making your overall harassment less effective.

#One additional point to add regarding this is that TSP has often advocated that DaDice is a legitimate company despite their refusal to provide any kind of evidence of controlling the amount of money they claim to control. @TSP - Can you explain why you would trust a brand new user with zero prior reputation to claim they have over a hundred thousand dollars worth of bitcoin, when you did not trust someone who has been around a while and had some number of successful trades?

TSP has also used a number of obvious shill accounts in order to make both QS and myself look bad. TSP also used at least one shill account to attempt to scam me.

Both of these are brand new accounts with only one post. After the first account posted, I had initially thought that this was a reputable member telling TSP that he is butthurt without risking that he get trolled and harassed. However once the second account posted, it became more apparent that TSP was using brand new accounts to make a very weak argument against TSP that should have looked like QS was using sock-puppet accounts.
@TSP - do you really think your argument was so weak that you needed to use additional sock-puppet accounts in order to further the reputation of both QS and myself? I am certain you are going to deny this, so I will say that this activity just makes you an asshole.


Some of you reading this may wonder what exactly this has to do with me. Not long ago, I was critical of TSP's opinion that others should not be warned about Maidak, who has credible scam accusations against him totaling thousands of dollars. He later followed up with me via PM asking me to delete the critical comments against him, and asked that I post in his meta thread against QS. I told him that I wanted to avoid the drama even though I think he is a scammer. We then went back and fourth via PM with him making very vague arguments that really did not make any sense to me, and I eventually ended it with that it is not my job to get him to agree that he is a scammer.


TL;DR - TSP is someone who will troll, and harass you if you disagree with him, or if you do business with someone that disagree with him. I would warn anyone reading this post to stay far away from TSP and avoid interacting with him at all costs because you never know if you will accidentally say something that he disagree with.

Kind Regards
Panthers52

~the only Panthes52

What are you talking about?

I think I was pretty clear in saying that you are wrong.

Using himself an escrow totally beats the purpose of using an escrow. It is not like he is the only escrow in the entire forum.

If I am dealing with Quickseller, I would use escrow. Now he suggest someone who is himself, which I didn't know then, and the deal goes through, I would feel myself cheated. It is not considered to be okay.

He can use make deals with people, use himself as escrow. completely okay?.. till the day he decides to scam everyone and leave the forum?
Quickseller's own arguments say that past performance of anyone is no guarantee to what anyone will do in the future.

Escrowing to himself is no escrow at all. If the other party wanted an escrow, and he uses himself, that would be kind of a breach of trust.

All this is, ignoring that he got a fee and a trust feedback for this, which makes things even more worse.




It is very well the other way round.
I would like to suggest this:

Any party whose reputation is damaged by Quickseller resulting in a loss of any kind or that costed the party a significant amount of time and eventually this particular party is proved reasonably innocent of the accusation, he/she should be compensated by QS for any loss he/she has suffered including opportunity cost. (i.e. the party should be able to claim a reasonably amount of damages from Quickseller)

Only saying this because I think it drives home a relevant point:

Wouldn't finding out that the "escrow" is the same person as your trading partner sorta defeat the purpose of escrow in such a situation?  Isn't the idea of using an escrow that you've got a neutral third party?

I agree 100% that if someone used their own alt as an escrow that would be wrong. I really hope that was not the case here, as that would be extremely shady. I can't really call that a scam in the traditional sense, but shady as hell. I really do not know if Panthers is QS - I really hope he is not one in the same. I do agree with TC though - if there is some collateral damage it is worth all the other stopped scams. 

LOL. Didn't know you would take that seriously..
Meant DD.

Well tspacepilot's time doesn't come free.