User "freeeestuffff" creates fake Bitcoin giveaways

[LoyceV]

Last week, user freeeestuffff created a Bitcoin giveaway: Free 1000$ worth of bitcoins give away with no conditions what soever....
I pointed him to the right board, but didn't join. Until now, he hasn't paid this giveaway. He did make excuses though:

Sorry for being late guys. I will be sending bitcoins to wallet addresses soon. May be I have to come up with some rule regarding new accounts but for this promotion I am not.

Sorry guys but I am more than willing to pay but still there are slots left and because of transaction fee it is wiser to pay all in once.
If you guys want I can close this thread and pay you guys right off.
I will be closing this thread within 48 hours and no more entry will be taken care of, so fast guys.

Today, he opened a new giveaway: Giving 0.002 btc to every newbie to get a feel of bitcoins...

This is my Reference topic for the Neutral feedback I'm going to leave user freeeestuffff. I'm not leaving negative feedback for this, as I think people should be smart enough not to believe everything they read on the internet, but a Neutral warning seems appropriate.
If he does what he promised, I'll gladly update my rating.

[Coyster]

The Bitcoin giveaways are definitely fake, the first thread makes more sense than the latter, it could be said he was looking for a good sportsbook to patronize in the first one, and prolly was paying users to get their attention/opinion, but the second giveaway to newbies, just 'so they can get a feel of Bitcoin' is too good to be true.

I know this user hasn't asked for anything from those joining in his giveaway, but I think the feedback is worth it, and what of newbies who could send PM's to this user asking why they haven't received the Bitcoin he promised, could they be scammed there, without the community knowing.

[LoyceV]

what of newbies who could send PM's to this user asking why they haven't received the Bitcoin he promised, could they be scammed there, without the community knowing.

That's their own responsibility, we can't really help them. I tried: How can we protect Newbies from getting scammed?)
Quoting theymos from that topic:

Honestly, I think that someone that naïve can't be protected.

[Yogee]

I think he is just conducting a survey of some sort for an article or blog and what better way to get a response than "giveaways". It's the same marketing stunt that traditional companies do to get your personal details.

He doesn't even attempt to screen participants in his second topic.

I advise you also accept only accounts created before today (without today), else some could just create accounts after accounts to grab free money.

May be from next time I will add this, but for this promotion no such obligations are required.

Maybe he's also writing something about how gullible members are with free money hehe.

[Little Mouse]

If he has not paid the previous giveaway yet, why not a negative tag here, LoyceV? Why are you considering this to be a neutral tag? He has promised to pay this, if he does not pay what he promised, he can not be trusted and thus, a negative tag would be better than a neutral I think. It would alert people to avoid hsi fake giveaway. Most of the users, more specifically most of the low ranked users do not take neutral tag as caution and need to check what's on it. As a result, in this case, I do not think neutral will be any benefit. I got your point though, people should be aware of themselves and have common sense.

[jackg]

If he has not paid the previous giveaway yet, why not a negative tag here, LoyceV? Why are you considering this to be a neutral tag? He has promised to pay this, if he does not pay what he promised, he can not be trusted and thus, a negative tag would be better than a neutral.

I think a neutral is best for now for a while. Especially if that user hasn't filled up all of his giveaway slots. I'm sure he can be flagged in due course if he looks like he's about to scam for actual funds.


I couldn't decide how his thread looked myself either here so I think a neutral tag was a good idea.

[NeuroticFish]

This is my Reference topic for the Neutral feedback I'm going to leave user freeeestuffff.

From what I see he got (already) banned.

[LoyceV]

If he has not paid the previous giveaway yet, why not a negative tag here, LoyceV? Why are you considering this to be a neutral tag? He has promised to pay this, if he does not pay what he promised, he can not be trusted and thus, a negative tag would be better than a neutral I think.

I can think of 2 reasons: I don't really consider this to have victims, because expecting a Newbie to pay is quite naive. If anything, it can even be a learning experience for the applicants without them losing money. And there wasn't a strict time limit, there's always a (very small) chance he'll pay in the future.

From what I see he got (already) banned.

Modlog confirms that, and his topics are gone.

Locked!

[LoyceV]

Unlocked: user freeeestuffff created a new topic.
He's also instantly banned again in modlog, which makes me wonder if something went wrong with recent Autobans.