warning Does Rami Steitieh A/K/A steitieh Shill? You Decide.

[N-A]

In March of 2016 @steitieh was found guilty of shill bidding on NamePros with @tha-she. While these two members are no longer permitted to conduct business with each other here, @steitieh is still able to participate in the marketplace and carries an undeserving PRO badge.

Recently, Rami was accused of shill bidding again. However, the evidence is circumstantial, at best, but it's admitted by him that he had close personal acquaintances bid on his auctions – something that we all know that most other marketplaces would never tolerate.

Beware: if you choose to bid on one of @steitieh 's auctions, know that someone else may be purposefully bidding you up.

 

[Eric Lyon]

In March of 2016 @steitieh was found guilty of shill bidding on NamePros with @tha-she.

* NamePros has never found @steitieh guilty of shill bidding.

---

Update: Status Resolved

• Click Here to Read the Summary

 

[N-A]

* NamePros has never found @steitieh guilty of shill bidding.

Oh, really?

We were able to confirm via video evidence that a few deals were completed between them as they should have been.

Unfortunately, they were unable to provide the necessary evidence (and we were unable to find the necessary evidence) to make a determination about the .CC auction. As they both told it, when asked separately, tha-she asked if she could back out of the deal and Rami agreed. Their stories match, but that doesn't mean much. They believe the conversation happened over the phone.

Since they were unable to provide the necessary evidence, they received the following message

 

[Eric Lyon]

Oh, really?

Correct:

We were able to confirm via video evidence that a few deals were completed between them as they should have been.

Unfortunately, they were unable to provide the necessary evidence (and we were unable to find the necessary evidence) to make a determination about the .CC auction. As they both told it, when asked separately, tha-she asked if she could back out of the deal and Rami agreed. Their stories match, but that doesn't mean much. They believe the conversation happened over the phone.

Since they were unable to provide the necessary evidence, they received the following message:
(Told not to bid on one another's auctions anymore as a precautionary measure.)​

Tha-she elaborated here:

• https://www.namepros.com/posts/5787854/

 

[N-A]

Correct.

Which part? Where you state that he's never been found guilty today, or where you state in March that he has?

(Removed private convo that David obtained as mod and may not share.)

 

[Eric Lyon]

where you state in March that he has?

I think you misinterpreted what I wrote in March. My apologies if I was unclear.

They were told not to bid on each other's auctions as a precautionary measure because one out of many deals could not be verified by us. The others that we looked into were verified.

 

[N-A]

I think you misinterpreted what I wrote in March. My apologies if I was unclear.

They were told not to bid on each other's auctions as a precautionary measure because one out of many deals could not be verified by us. The others that we looked into were verified.

Not misinterpreted at all, like you, I edited my previous post.

There's no debating it now.

 

[Eric Lyon]

No, you misunderstood still. Furthermore, you may not share private data that you obtained as a moderator. If you do that again, your account will be restricted and we will take action.

 

[Asfas1000]

One thing I know, I'm not bidding on NP auctions again. BIN or nothing.

 

[N-A]

No, you misunderstood still. Furthermore, you may not share private data that you obtained as a moderator. If you do that again, your account will be restricted and we will take action.

Sorry, I do not consider that private moderator data, as I used the proper channel as a concerned member: contact namePros management.

If it was private, your 2nd post should be amended: he was found guilty.

 

[Eric Lyon]

If it was private, your 2nd post should be amended: he was found guilty.

He was not found guilty. Sorry, but you misunderstood. Please read my messages in this thread.

 

[N-A]

I can't post my "private" data, but you did state that to them in private.

 

[N-A]

At any rate, @steitieh shills.

Beware...

 

[tha-she]

@David Walker like said in my previous post:

Since i am here on namepros i have done everything to keep my name as clean as possible, always paid, always pushed, always helped wherever possible, and Im sorry that im just not perfect and always do everything 100%, happens to anyone and everyone ,. and besides that, i got into that because rami was being nice, he could have just told me to beat it, and pay up for it, he didnt... from what i see hes getting blamed here because he was nice to me, which honestly makes me more uncomfortable then all the rest.

If you need to blame someone, BLAME ME... i was the one who ASKED rami to let the deal go and not ask me to PAY up...he did, and all he gets is a load of madness for it, imo thats just not right.

And i really hope that clears atleast this matter up for you, or any others.

 

[N-A]

@David Walker like said in my previous post:

Since i am here on namepros i have done everything to keep my name as clean as possible, always paid, always pushed, always helped wherever possible, and Im sorry that im just not perfect and always do everything 100%, happens to anyone and everyone ,. and besides that, i got into that because rami was being nice, he could have just told me to beat it, and pay up for it, he didnt... from what i see hes getting blamed here because he was nice to me, which honestly makes me more uncomfortable then all the rest.

If you need to blame someone, BLAME ME... i was the one who ASKED rami to let the deal go and not ask me to PAY up...he did, and all he gets is a load of madness for it, imo thats just not right.

And i really hope that clears atleast this matter up for you, or any others.

Do you mind sharing the private message that @Eric Lyon sent you in regards to doing business with Rami?

 

[Eric Lyon]

you did state that to them in private.

No, I did not. The message told them not to bid on one another's auctions because there was one deal we could not verify. I explained this to you, them, and in this thread, all in different ways. They all conveyed the same general message.

Edit for clarity: Our investigation and accumulated evidence showed zero signs of misconduct: only one case where a deal was discussed over the phone and we didn't have a way to make a determination on it. That one instance was inconclusive, but that does not mean anything unethical took place.

 

[N-A]

No, I did not. The message told them not to bid on one another's auctions because there was one deal we could not verify. I explained this to you, them, and in this thread, all in different ways. They all conveyed the same general message.

Do you mind posting the exact wording that you used back then?

 

[tha-she]

Do you mind sharing the private message that @Eric Lyon sent you in regards to doing business with Rami?

This IS Dependant on @Eric Lyon before I MYSELF, Share anything im not allowed to share, if he says i can do so, i absolutely do not mind

 

[Eric Lyon]

This IS Dependant on @Eric Lyon before I MYSELF, Share anything im not allowed to share, if he says i can do so, i absolutely do not mind

Those private conversations belong to you and @steitieh. You both may share them if you'd like.

 

[mad409]

Full moon..

 

[steitieh]

This IS Dependant on @Eric Lyon before I MYSELF, Share anything im not allowed to share, if he says i can do so, i absolutely do not mind

I am fine too.

 

[tha-she]

@David Walker

This message is for both of you. Please read it carefully, because there will be no further warnings or exceptions made. If we find out that you are not following the rules below, we will immediately revoke your access from the NamePros Marketplace forever. There will be no investigation and there will be no appeal. This is your one and only warning.

Since you two were unable to provide adequate evidence that shill bidding did not take place between the two of you, the rules below have been placed on your accounts and MUST be adhered to for all transactions you partake in on NamePros with anyone. There will be no exceptions to these rules.

Rules:

1. NEVER bid on an auction unless you have the funds ready to pay for it and will pay for it within 7 days.
2. You two may never bid on each other's auctions again. You can conduct deals via private message ("Conversation") on NamePros, but you may never participate in an auction run by the other member. You are banned from participating in each other's auctions.
3. All communication about deals that take place on NamePros, with ALL members, MUST take place in private messages ("Conversations") on NamePros. You may never discuss deals that originate on NamePros outside of NamePros. Never discuss them on Skype, email, phone, etc. If we ever notice that a deal was not discussed in full on NamePros again, you both will lose access to the NamePros Marketplace forever.

These rules are not debatable. You must follow them if you wish to use NamePros Marketplace.

I hope at this point you have what you are looking for, since i have told you 2x already now, i was sleepy and you, if you feel like it are open to blame me for it, i have always done right here with anyone, never got into anything shady with anyone althou having numerous of people on skype not just Rami and had NO intentions to do so here neither, it was simply a lack of attention from my side and i hope you understand somehow.

 

[N-A]

Since you two were unable to provide adequate evidence that shill bidding did not take place between the two of you, the rules below have been placed on your accounts and MUST be adhered to for all transactions you partake in on NamePros with anyone. There will be no exceptions to these rules.

And @Eric Lyon says @steitieh was never found guilty of shill bidding?

Care to retract your statement? It's clear as day.

 

[Eric Lyon]

Thank you @tha-she for posting the message.

@David Walker - I will say it once more: @steitieh has never been found guilty of shill bidding on NamePros.

There was one deal between them that we had insufficient information on to conclude one way or the other. It was unknown, and therefore we could not verify every deal. We did verify multiple deals and they all checked out, but since there was one deal that was undetermined, we decided to no longer let them bid on each other's auctions. This was a precautionary measure. If shill bidding was found, we would have removed their marketplace access immediately.

Whenever we discover a shill bidder, we revoke their marketplace access immediately. No exceptions.

 

[steitieh]

And @Eric Lyon says @steitieh was never found guilty of shill bidding?

Care to retract your statement? It's clear as day.

I can't believe I am still replying to your nonsense - But you gotta read deeper like you asked Eric to do - Unable to provide evidence of shill bidding DOES NOT confirm GUILT - Plus, you got the other party coming and telling you 20 times that she asked for it (I don't blame her and never will) you still insist on mentioning my name again and again. What is it exactly that you want? making a hero of yourself based on your ego? If a person is "FOUND GUILTY" he / she is banned - Now, go mind your own business!