SCAM ACCUSATION: TradeFortress + Inputs.io + theymos

[Lauda]

I'm about to update the OP with other possible people with possible involvement in this "hack"

I wonder who these might be.

[1714609392]

1714609392

[1714609392]

1714609392

[1714609392]

1714609392

[1714609392]

1714609392

[1714609392]

1714609392

[1714609392]

1714609392

[CrazyRabbi]

I'm about to update the OP with other possible people with possible involvement in this "hack"

I wonder who these might be.

OP Updated awaiting my ban now for stating theymos was in on it 

[Damnsammit]

OP Updated awaiting my ban now for stating theymos was in on it 

I wouldn't be surprised.  Isn't he the one who added TF to the default trust list?

I'm sure there are more than a couple n00bs who blindly trusted him because his trust is was green. 

[Lauda]

A ban is possible, but that's not fair.
We should be fee to make an accusation on anyone.

[CrazyRabbi]

OP Updated awaiting my ban now for stating theymos was in on it 

I wouldn't be surprised.  Isn't he the one who added TF to the default trust list?

I'm sure there are more than a couple n00bs who blindly trusted him because his trust is was green. 

I'm fully willing to take a ban for Justice 

[CrazyRabbi]

A ban is possible, but that's not fair.
We should be fee to make an accusation on anyone.

I'm willing to take that risk For Great Justice 

[Damnsammit]

Who is Kluge and why is he being accused?

[Lauda]

A ban is possible, but that's not fair.
We should be fee to make an accusation on anyone.

I'm willing to take that risk For Great Justice 

Good luck with that. Kluge still has the ad signature.

[CrazyRabbi]

And you think Kluge is involved, just because he hasn't removed his sig? I don't see any mention of him in the OP (besides his sig).

Mention of him is in the updated OP and the reasoning behind it.

[CrazyRabbi]

To top it off other Donators are to blame as they have a direct link to Banner Ads and revenue affiliated with Bitcoin Talk.

Donators do not have a "link" to banner ads and the revenue, wtf are you on about?

Did you mean staff?

I thought Kluge was a Moderator... He doesn't earn anything from that?

[CrazyRabbi]

To top it off other Donators are to blame as they have a direct link to Banner Ads and revenue affiliated with Bitcoin Talk.

Donators do not have a "link" to banner ads and the revenue, wtf are you on about?

Did you mean staff?

I thought Kluge was a Moderator... He doesn't earn anything from that?

moderators do, but donators do not.

i do not think kluge is a mod...


i dont get money from that shit, i can tell you that!




all the donator tag means is we got scammed by theymos when we gave money so he could get new software that never showed up...

Alright I've removed Kluge from the OP

[Coinseeker]

None of this is even remotely surprising.  It's always been obvious to me that Tradefortress was a scammer.  All his action are scammish.

Now, in order to prove an actual crime, one must prove intent.  You can steal $1 million and refund 50%-60% and remove intent, thus avoid legal prosecution.  You may also be able to maintain your reputation so you can get ready for the next scam because the community will be divided as to whether you are an actual scammer. Running only makes you look guilty and that's why he's making appearances.  This tactic is not new and TF is running it to perfection.  The victims all take a haircut and he walks away free and clear with a 6 figure score.  

TF is not a dumb guy and there is no way a hack occurred as described, out of ignorance.  This was a deliberate heist, that was likely planned from input.io's inception.  Anyone not smart enough to see that, deserves to lose their money in the future.  Why BCT continues to sponsor this clown and how he has avoided scammer tags, only leads me to believe they are taking a cut and/or love that ad revenue TF pays more than the community members themselves.  Absolutely shameful!  

and what if he eventually repays everyone back the full amount?
Good way of supporting him.

When every dime is repaid to every person who got scammed, I would GLADLY offer a public apology.  Until then, I have not and will not support this clown.  I knew he was a scammer and NEVER would have considered giving this guy any money.  Where there is smoke there is usually fire and he's been hotboxing this forum.  This is a classic scam technic and as you see the forum is torn on what to believe.  He's sitting somewhere laughing his ass off.  He's going to get away with this and it's more sad that you or anyone would defend such behavior and/or be so gullible as to not clearly see this is a premeditated scam by someone who thinks he's untouchable.  

[tspacepilot]

Well, TF went after me on another thread, falsely accusing me of stealing from him even though we never had any agreement.  I know the guy is a bit shady, and this would certainly be a serious amount to get away with.

[LittleD]

A ban is possible, but that's not fair.
We should be fee to make an accusation on anyone.

Freedom of bitcointalk!

[Lauda]

A ban is possible, but that's not fair.
We should be fee to make an accusation on anyone.

Freedom of bitcointalk!

Hopefully he doesn't get banned.

[Hitman10666]

Not that it's a significant amount, but I thought I'd add my little story. I had an inputs account for my faucet, and had like 0.01 BTC stolen (which was like 3/4 of what was in there). I emailed the contact address, and was told it would get reimbursed. I thought this was strange since nothing was mentioned about how or why it happened, even though I asked. I assumed someone had hacked my faucet or something. After a few days, no reimbursement of course. I emailed again yesterday, and was told to "see the homepage", and saw the hacked notification. So was I the first or second wave of hacked accounts? Who knows.

[Kouye]

Hopefully he doesn't get banned.

Not a chance. Policy here is not to ban scammers, to let them full latitude to pay back, which I agree with.
Paying back 70% looks like a very innovative way to scam here, but we need this to be done before going further.

[tvbcof]

Hopefully he doesn't get banned.

Not a chance. Policy here is not to ban scammers, to let them full latitude to pay back, which I agree with.
Paying back 70% looks like a very innovative way to scam here, but we need this to be done before going further.

Most scammers over the years will either pay back some amount, or claim that they are going to until everyone forgets.  Usually it's just a matter of waiting a month or so before some even bigger scam or other catastrophe eclipses it.  So, nothing very 'innovative' here.

[Kouye]

Most scammers over the years will either pay back some amount, or claim that they are going to until everyone forgets.  Usually it's just a matter of waiting a month or so before some even bigger scam or other catastrophe eclipses it.  So, nothing very 'innovative' here.

I beg to differ. If TF actually refunds ~70% to everyone, and handles the loudy people one by one, he will soon be a hero again.
That's a very clever move in my opinion, much better than any previous scam.

[tvbcof]

Most scammers over the years will either pay back some amount, or claim that they are going to until everyone forgets.  Usually it's just a matter of waiting a month or so before some even bigger scam or other catastrophe eclipses it.  So, nothing very 'innovative' here.

I beg to differ. If TF actually refunds ~70% to everyone, and handles the loudy people one by one, he will soon be a hero again.
That's a very clever move in my opinion, much better than any previous scam.

Paymium/Bitcoin-Central did much better.  They seem to have refunded almost all Instawallet customers.  The (supposed) hack took place at a value peak, and they price was cut by half by the time they payed out so (if they were scamming) they could have choosen one option or the other depending on what the price did.

One way or another, they ended up with the unclaimed Instawallet funds which were significant.  Most of them they probably got from Jav (original Instawallet developer) for a bargin if they even paid him anything at all.

If the Instwallet thing was a scam, it was well played, and if it was not, they came out well financially anyway.  So 'nicely done' one way or another.

--

I thought most people sensed that Tradefortress was pretty shady.  For whatever reason I abruptly stopped reading about inputs.io when I saw him attached to it.

Thankfully I some time ago started to consider an affiliation with bitcointalk.org to be indicative of someone being a potential scammer.  Unfortunately I suspect that a lot of newbies will be mis-guided by such an affiliation which is, I suspect, "not a bug but rather a feature" as they say.