Evidence of alias (u=1764044) long con scam!

[nullius]

Standard of evidence:  Reasonable, articulable suspicion.  Warrants examination.  Not “proved”.

Suspicious links:  Permabanned ban evader #813214 “amine14madrid”, #887705 “amine15madrid”, #888390 “amine16madrid”, and other known variations.

[...]

Curious here...  I’m mystified as to why you deemed these meritorious.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1572983.msg15790516#msg15790516

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1572983.msg15790928#msg15790928

They made me laugh out loud, which is very rare for this forum

As so oft the case, Alia’s explanation is (just barely) plausible.

[...]

• It is unlikely that a new user would ever even see the post-ban whine from the year 2016.  I myself oftentimes browse old threads; but usually, they are high-quality threads which have been linked from elsewhere, and/or have significant posts by famous users.  How and why did “alia” even find that thread?
• An award of merit is, by definition, an endorsement of the post.  What I had assumed to be “a bit of immaturity from a 19-year-old” could, in view of recent evidence, be a shout-out of solidarity to a friend—or a vanity homage to oneself.

[...]

Jeez. I noticed that account in theymos's red trust, thought it was funny, gave it merit. Don't read into it too much. I'm sure theymos can IP check.

Well, set this aside for now.  I’m glad you answered how you found it.  Seems likely enough.

I see that theymos also found it funny, though he didn’t go back and merit it:

theymos’ negative feedback for #883539 “Amine14madrid ALT”
Date: 2016-08-01
Risked BTC amount: 0.00000000      
Reference: (none)

Racist boy, always ban me just because im from Africa!!!

(Note that theymos gives no reference link; but it’s not exactly difficult to find all of the banned alt’s posts.)

Showing this image as himself: https://archive.is/fUKPe

Note:  This archive is from gyazo.com, which Alia also uses.  I had difficulty with that; I can’t see pictures there, because that site refuses to display the image without Javascript (which I have disabled since the 90s).


Now, Alia, I would appreciate if you would address what ibminer said.  Also this post by NLNico from some pages ago, which you seem to have ignored:

All of that without even getting into the other accounts:

--good details, click to see--

I ask this, not so much to prosecute you, but because I really did mean this:

For the record:  I still think that the identity of the person(s) controlling #1764044 “alia” is questionable.

I’m probably the only person on this entire forum who isn’t absolutely convinced that you are favours/revcback/Light/et al.  Closest thing to a friend you’ve still got here.  It would be nice if you could show some evidence of your identity better than “Skype me”, which your alleged (?) brother could also do:

You wanting to be verified on skype means absolutely nothing. Just like it meant nothing when you did it from your favours account in the same fashion:
https://archive.is/gfWso#selection-8169.51-8169.103
https://archive.is/gfWso#selection-8823.0-8832.1

Also, if you guys still believe I am a scammer, even after I repaid aTriz $2,000 even after he broke the contract then you are all braindead. RIP

Why should my rep be tarnished because of what my brother did? I'm sure that if he was in the situation of taking 0.18 btc and running he would have no hesitation, but I have a moral compass. Why am I being lynched for someone else's wrongdoings?

That struck me as not-scammy.  Me, at least; others don’t seem so impressed.  But really, all it means is that either you do have a conscience, or this is an impressive long con.  0.18 BTC could be an “investment”, worth much more down the road.  Yes, such is what this world has come to...

If you could prove that you are a different individual than your “brother”, that would go a long way toward showing that you returned that money for conscience.  Based on what I read at all the links others dug up, I’m not so sure that “if he was in the situation of taking 0.18 btc and running he would have no hesitation”.  I think he may return it to buy trust, so he could scam out more.

Are you him?  I hope you’re not.  If you’re not, then I might believe that you did that for conscience, yes; and that would show some basic common decency on your part.

[1713537754]

1713537754

[alia]

Standard of evidence:  Reasonable, articulable suspicion.  Warrants examination.  Not “proved”.

Suspicious links:  Permabanned ban evader #813214 “amine14madrid”, #887705 “amine15madrid”, #888390 “amine16madrid”, and other known variations.

[...]

Curious here...  I’m mystified as to why you deemed these meritorious.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1572983.msg15790516#msg15790516

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1572983.msg15790928#msg15790928

They made me laugh out loud, which is very rare for this forum

As so oft the case, Alia’s explanation is (just barely) plausible.

[...]

• It is unlikely that a new user would ever even see the post-ban whine from the year 2016.  I myself oftentimes browse old threads; but usually, they are high-quality threads which have been linked from elsewhere, and/or have significant posts by famous users.  How and why did “alia” even find that thread?
• An award of merit is, by definition, an endorsement of the post.  What I had assumed to be “a bit of immaturity from a 19-year-old” could, in view of recent evidence, be a shout-out of solidarity to a friend—or a vanity homage to oneself.

[...]

Jeez. I noticed that account in theymos's red trust, thought it was funny, gave it merit. Don't read into it too much. I'm sure theymos can IP check.

Well, set this aside for now.  I’m glad you answered how you found it.  Seems likely enough.

I see that theymos also found it funny, though he didn’t go back and merit it:

theymos’ negative feedback for #883539 “Amine14madrid ALT”
Date: 2016-08-01
Risked BTC amount: 0.00000000      
Reference: (none)

Racist boy, always ban me just because im from Africa!!!

(Note that theymos gives no reference link; but it’s not exactly difficult to find all of the banned alt’s posts.)

Showing this image as himself: https://archive.is/fUKPe

Note:  This archive is from gyazo.com, which Alia also uses.  I had difficulty with that; I can’t see pictures there, because that site refuses to display the image without Javascript (which I have disabled since the 90s).


Now, Alia, I would appreciate if you would address what ibminer said.  Also this post by NLNico from some pages ago, which you seem to have ignored:

All of that without even getting into the other accounts:

--good details, click to see--

I ask this, not so much to prosecute you, but because I really did mean this:

For the record:  I still think that the identity of the person(s) controlling #1764044 “alia” is questionable.

I’m probably the only person on this entire forum who isn’t absolutely convinced that you are favours/revcback/Light/et al.  Closest thing to a friend you’ve still got here.  It would be nice if you could show some evidence of your identity better than “Skype me”, which your alleged (?) brother could also do:

You wanting to be verified on skype means absolutely nothing. Just like it meant nothing when you did it from your favours account in the same fashion:
https://archive.is/gfWso#selection-8169.51-8169.103
https://archive.is/gfWso#selection-8823.0-8832.1

Also, if you guys still believe I am a scammer, even after I repaid aTriz $2,000 even after he broke the contract then you are all braindead. RIP

Why should my rep be tarnished because of what my brother did? I'm sure that if he was in the situation of taking 0.18 btc and running he would have no hesitation, but I have a moral compass. Why am I being lynched for someone else's wrongdoings?

That struck me as not-scammy.  Me, at least; others don’t seem so impressed.  But really, all it means is that either you do have a conscience, or this is an impressive long con.  0.18 BTC could be an “investment”, worth much more down the road.  Yes, such is what this world has come to...

If you could prove that you are a different individual than your “brother”, that would go a long way toward showing that you returned that money for conscience.  Based on what I read at all the links others dug up, I’m not so sure that “if he was in the situation of taking 0.18 btc and running he would have no hesitation”.  I think he may return it to buy trust, so he could scam out more.

Are you him?  I hope you’re not.  If you’re not, then I might believe that you did that for conscience, yes; and that would show some basic common decency on your part.

If I wanted to do a "long con" I'd change my MAC, buy a VPN, and work on a new account immediately. This is an account that has a 13 page long "scam" report on it, and it has negative trust from 7 DT users. I had no reason at all to pay back aTriz, except for the fact that I'm not a scammer. The trust ratings certainly won't be removed, nobody will trust me with even $2 - but I'm glad I could rise above aTriz and keep my word, unlike him.

nullius, you and I have talked via PM, and I remember everything you talked to me about. Skype me - you can not only verify the way I look, but you can also interview me. I'll answer anything you want about bitcoin, about the forum, about our discussions, everything. This is the only form of valid proof that I see.

[suchmoon]

Why should my rep be tarnished because of what my brother did? I'm sure that if he was in the situation of taking 0.18 btc and running he would have no hesitation, but I have a moral compass. Why am I being lynched for someone else's wrongdoings?

Typical scammy weaseling. You picked one concern that has been thoroughly explained (ibminer provided reasonable arguments why you can't be trusted even if you have a brother) and you mingled it with some pitty-whoring nonsense. There is more to it than just your alleged brother. You have exhibited many untrustworthy traits and your neg trust feedback reflects that.

If I wanted to do a "long con" I'd change my MAC, buy a VPN, and work on a new account immediately. This is an account that has a 13 page long "scam" report on it, and it has negative trust from 7 DT users. I had no reason at all to pay back aTriz, except for the fact that I'm not a scammer. The trust ratings certainly won't be removed, nobody will trust me with even $2 - but I'm glad I could rise above aTriz and keep my word, unlike him.

nullius, you and I have talked via PM, and I remember everything you talked to me about. Skype me - you can not only verify the way I look, but you can also interview me. I'll answer anything you want about bitcoin, about the forum, about our discussions, everything. This is the only form of valid proof that I see.

Stop fishing for identities of forum users with your ridiculous skype demands.

[OgNasty]

I'm glad I could rise above aTriz and keep my word, unlike him.

Scammers mad at users who don't keep their word.  The irony!

[alia]

Why should my rep be tarnished because of what my brother did? I'm sure that if he was in the situation of taking 0.18 btc and running he would have no hesitation, but I have a moral compass. Why am I being lynched for someone else's wrongdoings?

Typical scammy weaseling. You picked one concern that has been thoroughly explained (ibminer provided reasonable arguments why you can't be trusted even if you have a brother) and you mingled it with some pitty-whoring nonsense. There is more to it than just your alleged brother. You have exhibited many untrustworthy traits and your neg trust feedback reflects that.

If I wanted to do a "long con" I'd change my MAC, buy a VPN, and work on a new account immediately. This is an account that has a 13 page long "scam" report on it, and it has negative trust from 7 DT users. I had no reason at all to pay back aTriz, except for the fact that I'm not a scammer. The trust ratings certainly won't be removed, nobody will trust me with even $2 - but I'm glad I could rise above aTriz and keep my word, unlike him.

nullius, you and I have talked via PM, and I remember everything you talked to me about. Skype me - you can not only verify the way I look, but you can also interview me. I'll answer anything you want about bitcoin, about the forum, about our discussions, everything. This is the only form of valid proof that I see.

Stop fishing for identities of forum users with your ridiculous skype demands.

So. If a user Skypes me and verifies my identity, I can magically steal theirs! Because fuck logic

[alia]

I'm glad I could rise above aTriz and keep my word, unlike him.

Scammers mad at users who don't keep their word.  The irony!

aTriz exited the contract even though I broke no terms. I still paid him back. Whatever

[OgNasty]

I'm glad I could rise above aTriz and keep my word, unlike him.

Scammers mad at users who don't keep their word.  The irony!

aTriz exited the contract even though I broke no terms. I still paid him back. Whatever

I'm not disagreeing with you.  Clearly there was wrong on both sides here.

[alia]

I'm glad I could rise above aTriz and keep my word, unlike him.

Scammers mad at users who don't keep their word.  The irony!

aTriz exited the contract even though I broke no terms. I still paid him back. Whatever

I'm not disagreeing with you.  Clearly there was wrong on both sides here.

You seem like a reasonable person. I'm sure even you would agree that aTriz scammed me, and I have shown the opposite behaviour

[OgNasty]

I'm glad I could rise above aTriz and keep my word, unlike him.

Scammers mad at users who don't keep their word.  The irony!

aTriz exited the contract even though I broke no terms. I still paid him back. Whatever

I'm not disagreeing with you.  Clearly there was wrong on both sides here.

You seem like a reasonable person. I'm sure even you would agree that aTriz scammed me, and I have shown the opposite behaviour

My take on the situation is that you're both individuals I wouldn't want to be associated or do business with.  From what I can deduce from the situation, you appear to have lied about your identity and attempted to sell a script with the claim that it exploits online casinos for guaranteed profit.  aTriz not only paid you for an advertisement and didn't live up to his side of the agreement, but from what I can tell he also gave you funds for the specific purpose of defrauding an online casino by exploiting it's system with an automated script.  

[suchmoon]

So. If a user Skypes me and verifies my identity, I can magically steal theirs! Because fuck logic

I didn't say anything about stealing identity, you're twisting it again. Learning someone's identity and stealing it (i.e. impersonating) is not the same.

And yes, if e.g. I would skype you, you could learn my identity. I think you even admitted yourself somewhere in this whole shitshow that Skype is not good for anonymity, I just can't be arsed to find it now. So no reasonable person would do it and you know that. You're just looking for idiots now or playing some game where you'll claim a win because no one else wanted to participate.

[alia]

So. If a user Skypes me and verifies my identity, I can magically steal theirs! Because fuck logic

I didn't say anything about stealing identity, you're twisting it again. Learning someone's identity and stealing it (i.e. impersonating) is not the same.

And yes, if e.g. I would skype you, you could learn my identity. I think you even admitted yourself somewhere in this whole shitshow that Skype is not good for anonymity, I just can't be arsed to find it now. So no reasonable person would do it and you know that. You're just looking for idiots now or playing some game where you'll claim a win because no one else wanted to participate.

Jesus... I meant a one-way Skype call, retard.

[alia]

I'm glad I could rise above aTriz and keep my word, unlike him.

Scammers mad at users who don't keep their word.  The irony!

aTriz exited the contract even though I broke no terms. I still paid him back. Whatever

I'm not disagreeing with you.  Clearly there was wrong on both sides here.

You seem like a reasonable person. I'm sure even you would agree that aTriz scammed me, and I have shown the opposite behaviour

My take on the situation is that you're both individuals I wouldn't want to be associated or do business with.  From what I can deduce from the situation, you appear to have lied about your identity and attempted to sell a script with the claim that it exploits online casinos for guaranteed profit.  aTriz not only paid you for an advertisement and didn't live up to his side of the agreement, but from what I can tell he also gave you funds for the specific purpose of defrauding an online casino by exploiting it's system with an automated script.  

>lied about identity

Never

>claimed guaranteed profit

Never

[nullius]

>claimed guaranteed profit

Never

Whether or not that be so, did you ever disclose this?  (Boldface added.)

Anyone who asks me to use it with a larger amount is stupid.

1) ROI is ROI. Whether it's on 1 bit or 1 bitcoin the return percentage is the same.
2) Since the script fails 9/10 times, I don't want to lose my coin. I will never use the script on significant amounts of money, unless it's for investors

[alia]

>claimed guaranteed profit

Never

Whether or not that be so, did you ever disclose this?  (Boldface added.)

Anyone who asks me to use it with a larger amount is stupid.

1) ROI is ROI. Whether it's on 1 bit or 1 bitcoin the return percentage is the same.
2) Since the script fails 9/10 times, I don't want to lose my coin. I will never use the script on significant amounts of money, unless it's for investors

I have. Risk is also told to investors. There is a chance of losses. That is why I don't use it on personal funds too much. Luckily, no investor has lost money so far (and no more will because I am no longer using the script commercially)

[suchmoon]

So. If a user Skypes me and verifies my identity, I can magically steal theirs! Because fuck logic

I didn't say anything about stealing identity, you're twisting it again. Learning someone's identity and stealing it (i.e. impersonating) is not the same.

And yes, if e.g. I would skype you, you could learn my identity. I think you even admitted yourself somewhere in this whole shitshow that Skype is not good for anonymity, I just can't be arsed to find it now. So no reasonable person would do it and you know that. You're just looking for idiots now or playing some game where you'll claim a win because no one else wanted to participate.

Jesus... I meant a one-way Skype call, retard.

I'm not Jesus and I don't give a shit what you meant. No one should skype you under any circumstances, one-way or three-way.

Stay classy, scam girl.

[nullius]

>claimed guaranteed profit

Never

Whether or not that be so, did you ever disclose this?  (Boldface added.)

Anyone who asks me to use it with a larger amount is stupid.

1) ROI is ROI. Whether it's on 1 bit or 1 bitcoin the return percentage is the same.
2) Since the script fails 9/10 times, I don't want to lose my coin. I will never use the script on significant amounts of money, unless it's for investors

I have. Risk is also told to investors. There is a chance of losses. That is why I don't use it on personal funds too much. Luckily, no investor has lost money so far (and no more will because I am no longer using the script commercially)

“Anyone who asks me to use it with a larger amount is stupid...  I will never use the script on significant amounts of money, unless it's for investors” — Alia

Ergo, investors = stupid.  Did you disclose to them that they’re stupid?

You “offered” to me that I could invest a minimum of 1.2 BTC.  You did not disclose to me that I would be stupid to invest 1.2+ BTC.

[alia]

>claimed guaranteed profit

Never

Whether or not that be so, did you ever disclose this?  (Boldface added.)

Anyone who asks me to use it with a larger amount is stupid.

1) ROI is ROI. Whether it's on 1 bit or 1 bitcoin the return percentage is the same.
2) Since the script fails 9/10 times, I don't want to lose my coin. I will never use the script on significant amounts of money, unless it's for investors

I have. Risk is also told to investors. There is a chance of losses. That is why I don't use it on personal funds too much. Luckily, no investor has lost money so far (and no more will because I am no longer using the script commercially)

“Anyone who asks me to use it with a larger amount is stupid.”

Ergo investors = stupid.  Did you disclose to them that they’re stupid?

You “offered” to me that I could invest a minimum of 1.2 BTC.  You did not disclose to me that I would be stupid to invest 1.2+ BTC.

I was referring to my test run. They are not stupid for playing with 1.2 BTC. They are stupid for suggesting that whether I play with 1 bit or 1 bitcoin makes a difference to the ROI. Do you get it?

[alia]

So. If a user Skypes me and verifies my identity, I can magically steal theirs! Because fuck logic

I didn't say anything about stealing identity, you're twisting it again. Learning someone's identity and stealing it (i.e. impersonating) is not the same.

And yes, if e.g. I would skype you, you could learn my identity. I think you even admitted yourself somewhere in this whole shitshow that Skype is not good for anonymity, I just can't be arsed to find it now. So no reasonable person would do it and you know that. You're just looking for idiots now or playing some game where you'll claim a win because no one else wanted to participate.

Jesus... I meant a one-way Skype call, retard.

I'm not Jesus and I don't give a shit what you meant. No one should skype you under any circumstances, one-way or three-way.

Stay classy, scam girl.

>calls me scam girl even though I'm not a scammer

And when I offer to verify myself, you assume I mean a two-way Skype call. And when I explain further that I meant a one-way call, you back out of the convo with a dumbass line. Seriously... sad behaviour

[nullius]

Anyone who asks me to use it with a larger amount is stupid.

1) ROI is ROI. Whether it's on 1 bit or 1 bitcoin the return percentage is the same.
2) Since the script fails 9/10 times, I don't want to lose my coin. I will never use the script on significant amounts of money, unless it's for investors

I have. Risk is also told to investors. There is a chance of losses. That is why I don't use it on personal funds too much. Luckily, no investor has lost money so far (and no more will because I am no longer using the script commercially)

“Anyone who asks me to use it with a larger amount is stupid...  I will never use the script on significant amounts of money, unless it's for investors” — Alia

Ergo investors = stupid.  Did you disclose to them that they’re stupid?

You “offered” to me that I could invest a minimum of 1.2 BTC.  You did not disclose to me that I would be stupid to invest 1.2+ BTC.

I was referring to my test run. They are not stupid for playing with 1.2 BTC. They are stupid for suggesting that whether I play with 1 bit or 1 bitcoin makes a difference to the ROI. Do you get it?

Ok, please explain this to me like I’m stupid.  What’s different about the test run?  Does the test run script fail 9/10 times, whereas the real script you saved for investors only fails 8.99/10 times?  Do you have two scripts, the “test run” script which is stupid to use for large amounts and should only be judged on ROI, and the real script which is fine to use for 1.2+ BTC?

The logic here is getting so convoluted that I have trouble arguing against it.  It’s “not even wrong”.

Edit:  I see what you’re claiming here:  That people asking you why you don’t just make yourself rich with the script are somehow stupid for asking the obvious question.

Better question, which you have not addressed:  Did you ever disclose to investors that “the script fails 9/10 times”?  You did not disclose that to me, when you “offered” that I could invest a minimum of 1.2 BTC.

Obvious note:  A 90% failure rate is very different from, “Risk is also told to investors. There is a chance of losses.”.

[suchmoon]

So. If a user Skypes me and verifies my identity, I can magically steal theirs! Because fuck logic

I didn't say anything about stealing identity, you're twisting it again. Learning someone's identity and stealing it (i.e. impersonating) is not the same.

And yes, if e.g. I would skype you, you could learn my identity. I think you even admitted yourself somewhere in this whole shitshow that Skype is not good for anonymity, I just can't be arsed to find it now. So no reasonable person would do it and you know that. You're just looking for idiots now or playing some game where you'll claim a win because no one else wanted to participate.

Jesus... I meant a one-way Skype call, retard.

I'm not Jesus and I don't give a shit what you meant. No one should skype you under any circumstances, one-way or three-way.

Stay classy, scam girl.

>calls me scam girl even though I'm not a scammer

And when I offer to verify myself, you assume I mean a two-way Skype call. And when I explain further that I meant a one-way call, you back out of the convo with a dumbass line. Seriously... sad behaviour

Any skype call by definition is at least two-way. If you mean that your "verifier" doesn't need to turn on their camera - that doesn't make it "one-way". No one in their right mind should want to leak their personal details and IP address (or go out of their way to conceal it) for a meaningless verification.

You're a scammer on multiple counts. Your spastic trolling isn't gonna get you out of this. You're just showing your real 15yo maturity.