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..