What should I do if I think somebody soon will scam someone?

[holydarkness]

Until there's a direct evidences and connection, best way to approach this will be to tag with neutral and later change it as the situation developed.

Honestly, I'm not sure if guesses and assumptions are enough even for a neutral tag. Everything is based on sending 2 random merits, probably and very likely they are really not enough.
Yes, there is a possibility here, as far as I can see both accounts are very interested and active in the Invites & Accounts section, but that's still just a guess.

In this forum, there is never enought evidence to nail anyone, unless the suspect doesn't have what it takes to vindicate themselves. For instances;

• When you connect accounts through their writing style just as FatFork did, we will say it's not an evidence enough.  Maybe a coincidence
• When you connect accounts by uncovering direct transactions to someone's address, the forum will say they want to tarnish the user's reputation just like the case of LDL
• When you connect people always transacting with same address they will say that they are colleagues and have been trading for a long time just like John Abraham's case
• When you connect them with social media handle, the accused will say they copy pasted it through bounty application

It is just like that, and no matter how careful you monitor both accounts in question, you cannot successfully connect them but I'm sure both accounts are controlled by same person looking at;
Coincidence of active and exit of both accounts;
Writing method;
From same locality;
The merit flow;
I think a neutral tag is worth it but let the neutral have the weight of neutral. Because some neutral tags are as powerful as red tags due to the tone used in the tag.

I will have to beg to differ on the "never enough evidence to nail anyone" part, though your later part bear some weight of truth; "unless the suspect doesn't have what it takes to vindicate themselves", which can be read as, "unless the suspect can no longer defend themselves as being not guilty".

It is quite established throughout the forum that cases being raised here should be seen on case-by-case basis. And be it we applying the presumption of guilt or the presumption of innocence, both presumptions emphasize of piling evidences up to beyond rational doubt that someone did or did not do something that's being accused. The keyword, for this topic, is "piling evidences".

If we use your instances, sure separately, they are circumstantial. FatFork's writing style can be coincidental [as I've argued it myself], same address of John can be a transaction between colleagues, social media handles can be copied. But if they're piling on top of each other, it'll push the barrier of reasonal doubt. This is why Little Mouse and PP suggested to utilize neutral tag as a marker to remind ourselves about the account while we dig deeper before taking further steps based on the findings.

[1714926256]

1714926256

[1714926256]

1714926256

[1714926256]

1714926256

[1714926256]

1714926256

[m2017]

~snip

It's good when forum members are vigilant so that no one is deceived.

There is such a wording that if there is no composition (fact) of a crime, then there is no offense.

What should you do? Just watch the changes of these accounts. Perhaps there is a connection between these accounts, and perhaps not. But until you can provide the necessary evidence, you have nothing to show them / him. Keep your finger on the pulse and, if necessary, urgently warn of the danger.

[icalical]

All you got is only circumstantial evidence, if you really want to tie both account, you will need at least to prove that both account use same bitcoin/other crypto address or if they use/refer to same non-bitcointalk account.
I also don't think tagging the account in any way is fair and it's not necessary, it's a newbie account for now, so people wouldn't be just trusting him/her with some money.

[zaim7413]

You can only suspect someone who is considered to have malicious intent, but you cannot accuse someone else of being a scammer without valid evidence.

Yes I know I don't have any 100% proof and that's why I wont and cant give negative feedback or accusing him for something.
That's why I asked what I should do.

Lure him into your trap if you are sure that he will immediately deceive someone, direct him to the telegram channel and then follow all his wishes. When at some point you hold the evidence, immediately make an accusation with the attachment of valid evidence.
Don't be hasty in taking action on unproven accusations.

[rby]

~snip

It's good when forum members are vigilant so that no one is deceived.

There is such a wording that if there is no composition (fact) of a crime, then there is no offense.

What should you do? Just watch the changes of these accounts. Perhaps there is a connection between these accounts, and perhaps not. But until you can provide the necessary evidence, you have nothing to show them / him. Keep your finger on the pulse and, if necessary, urgently warn of the danger.

Same thought with Holydarkness, which is a correct stand anyways. All these shows the leniency of the forum which is a factor of the level of freedom the forum inherited from the ideology of bitcoin.
It is not a crime yet unless it is committed;
Even if it's committed, if not convicted, he remains a suspect.

[_BlackStar]

You can only suspect someone who is considered to have malicious intent, but you cannot accuse someone else of being a scammer without valid evidence.

Of course - someone shouldn't just throw mud at the wall.
If you have to suspect someone, then be an intelligence person, I mean watch their moves and get valid evidence before making accusations against them.

But really - I just wanted to create my own shortcut where I would probably just ignore his profile and put him on my distrust list. Every other user has the same responsibility for the safety of themselves and their money - meaning they should be responsible for doing any analysis on someone before trusting them with money.

[Poker Player]

Honestly, I'm not sure if guesses and assumptions are enough even for a neutral tag.

If my memory does not deceive me, when debating on the subject you told me that the neutral tag can be used for anything, or practically anything. Does that ring a bell?

[holydarkness]

You can only suspect someone who is considered to have malicious intent, but you cannot accuse someone else of being a scammer without valid evidence.

Of course - someone shouldn't just throw mud at the wall.
If you have to suspect someone, then be an intelligence person, I mean watch their moves and get valid evidence before making accusations against them.

But really - I just wanted to create my own shortcut where I would probably just ignore his profile and put him on my distrust list. Every other user has the same responsibility for the safety of themselves and their money - meaning they should be responsible for doing any analysis on someone before trusting them with money.

Though it is a good way to tread through this forum, by putting people to your ignore list so they doesn't bother you anymore, it is a rather incorrect way to use trust list. Trust and distrust [~someone] are meant to express your opinion about how accurate someone's judgement is, it should be based on the records of the feedback they leave on other users, not how trustworthy they are on dealing with funds. The trustworthiness of funds are belong to the feedback [positive, neutral, and negative feedback].

[CYBER_COWBOY]

Now MadHatters got his first feedback, it's negative and a bit strange. - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=3554014

Seems to have some kind of been with a Full member that in his feedback got accused for some kind of account selling/buying.

Post-Cosmic just did (the one that gave him the feedback)
This user's password was reset recently.
This user recently woke up from a long period of inactivity.

( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5458374.msg62498489#msg62498489 )



 

[Doan9269]

Take a look into the situations that happens and know what warrant such user to have found him as the major target to scam, some cannot control the way they make use of the social media or other quick and fast means of making money, which obviously means that we do make it a way opened for others to scam us through where we go, things we do and what we give out to the public which should have been private with us alone, no one can easily scam us if we had never left vulnerability down for them to use against us.

[CYBER_COWBOY]

Take a look into the situations that happens and know what warrant such user to have found him as the major target to scam, some cannot control the way they make use of the social media or other quick and fast means of making money, which obviously means that we do make it a way opened for others to scam us through where we go, things we do and what we give out to the public which should have been private with us alone, no one can easily scam us if we had never left vulnerability down for them to use against us.

Sorry I did not understand a thing, have this to do anything with the topic? (Sorry my English is not 100%)

[ScamViruS]

@TheChin0s and @MadHatters can be discussed whether these two accounts are connected, but there is no evidence between these two accounts that the owner of the two accounts is thechin0s. Here we find only merit transection as proof which is not enough. But I am pretty sure that TheChin0s is not a trusted member, because he tried to take a loan using alt account. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5408527.msg61723065#msg61723065

So you may be right to assume that he came to the forum with another alt account with the intention of scamming in any way, but this cannot be proved due to insufficient evidence. But after reading your investigation and reviewing the past activities of @TheChin0s, it is possible that these two accounts are connected, but I will wait for full proof that they are alt accounts. If you think this user may be scamming someone, follow this user's activity, and if you see something suspicious, post it back to this forum to alert community members.

[CryptSafe]

OP, I think there is no much stress about this. When receiving any message or chat  on this platform which seems suspicious what is expected of you is to make use of the report botton and report the message to forum moderator for urgent actions so as to save yourself and every other forum member from falling for such scam.

Looking at the reply from other members here, it is obviously clear that the user is likely a scammer who goes around scamming people and possibly has many alt account which they use in accomplishing their nefarious act. I wonder how any forum member that must have been scammed by them on this platform.

[CYBER_COWBOY]

OP, I think there is no much stress about this. When receiving any message or chat  on this platform which seems suspicious what is expected of you is to make use of the report botton and report the message to forum moderator for urgent actions so as to save yourself and every other forum member from falling for such scam.

Looking at the reply from other members here, it is obviously clear that the user is likely a scammer who goes around scamming people and possibly has many alt account which they use in accomplishing their nefarious act. I wonder how any forum member that must have been scammed by them on this platform.

Yes I agree with you 100% on this, but also it is better to try to stop the scam before it happens. 
I see its very strange that this MadHatters change telegram username all the time, and have so much to offer, but I am pretty sure nobody will fall for this scam attempt.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3554014;sa=showPosts