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

[CYBER_COWBOY]

Hello.

If I am almost positive that a person on this forum soon will scam somebody, what should I do?
The problem is that the person has not scammed anyone yet! But I am pretty sure it's just a matter of time.

The account is a newbie account, so of course won't a person that know how this forum works fall for a scam.
But its still bad if a new user get scammed in my opinion.

Not long time ago he (thechin0s) scammed another person (newbie).
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5452318.msg62226312#msg62226312

If people look this message : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5452318.msg62230136#msg62230136
This person have done this before with many other alts.


thechin0s: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3506957
I think this is thechin0s new account:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3554014 - Madhatters.

Why?
- Same day and time thechin0s got accused for scamming Madhatters showed up.
- And when I look around this Madhatters seems to be able to offer people many things. He answer in many many threads where people is looking to buy stuff.
- They talk the same if you look how their messages.
- From same speaking country
- thechin0s  have sent two merits to Madhatters for random posts.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5447572.msg62259924#msg62259924
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5452484.msg62255417#msg62255417

I don't have 100% proof but I think its kinda obvious that this is the same person, of course I can be wrong then I will apologize and remove this instantly.



What should I do? Just leave it? It looks like he have done a lot of scamming on this forum and it would be great if that ended.
Since Madhatters has not scammed anyone yet it's wrong to give any negative feedback, but I want people to be aware and careful.

UPDATE 19/07-23

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 )

[Little Mouse]

What should I do? Just leave it?
Since Madhatters has not scammed anyone yet, so it's wrong to give any negative feedback, but I want people to be aware and careful.

You don't have some good proofs to accuse him as a scammer. I haven't looked deeply at the coincidences you have shared. However, this isn't enough to call someone other people's alt. So, it doesn't make sense to tag someone. You can still monitor the account and if you find something suspicious, then you can take further steps.
Well, there's neutral feedback that can be used here though. You can apply neutral feedback and out this thread in the reference link.

[CYBER_COWBOY]

What should I do? Just leave it?
Since Madhatters has not scammed anyone yet, so it's wrong to give any negative feedback, but I want people to be aware and careful.

You don't have some good proofs to accuse him as a scammer. I haven't looked deeply at the coincidences you have shared. However, this isn't enough to call someone other people's alt. So, it doesn't make sense to tag someone. You can still monitor the account and if you find something suspicious, then you can take further steps.
Well, there's neutral feedback that can be used here though. You can apply neutral feedback and out this thread in the reference link.

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.

[Poker Player]

What you have done is fine, open a thread in this section to discuss these things. I would supplement it with neutral feedback with this thread as a reference. If you don't have more evidence, you shouldn't use the negative, just the neutral, which you could change in the future if more evidence appears. So I agree on this with Little Mouse.

[CYBER_COWBOY]

What you have done is fine, open a thread in this section to discuss these things. I would supplement it with neutral feedback with this thread as a reference. If you don't have more evidence, you shouldn't use the negative, just the neutral, which you could change in the future if more evidence appears. So I agree on this with Little Mouse.

Okay.
Thank you! 

[dkbit98]

What should I do? Just leave it?
Since Madhatters has not scammed anyone yet, so it's wrong to give any negative feedback, but I want people to be aware and careful.

You can't give negative feedback to someone just because you suspect he is alt account from another scammer.
First you need to find some proof of at least same style of writing, spelling mistakes, address connections, same social media accounts, etc.
If there was merit exchange between this members and if he is active in similar boards like TheChin0s than there is a reason for suspecting him, so you can monitor his activity for now.
 

[FatFork]

It really looks like another alt of the old scammer Humbertin19_ / HumberRoll / DavidXXXX etc. I think it was mentioned somewhere that he was from Colombia or Ecuador, which explains the language.

However, as others have already pointed out, that's not enough for a negative tag at this time. It's good that you voiced your suspicions, though.

EDIT:
Some additional intriguing "coincidences":

I can help with you

Send me message

Maybe i can help with you this request

contact TG eRnehones

telegram @eRnehones

I can help with you

Hello I can help with you

Telegram Pibworld

Hello i can help with you

Hello i can help with you

telegram @apacheoduth or email lobalokas@yahoo.com

I will help with you

PM plz

[Wiwo]

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

You mentioned that you don't have 100% proof and that push me to ask if you have any proof to nail the perceived scammer since you said 100% proof any proof will work just fine for this as long as it shows that both accounts are connected.

If there is nothing as proof to point to that fact,  then your accusation may be trashed as a mere assumption since you are without evidence to support your claims.

[holydarkness]

I triple what's said by Little Mouse and PP. These evidences so far, even what's provided by FatFork above me --good digging, though, FatFork-- was still circumstantial. There's no definitive connection between the two accounts. Given they're speaking the same language, it's probable thst the grammatical error of, "I can help with you" is a common practice.

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.

[CryptoHeadlineNews]

I don't have 100% proof but I think its kinda obvious that this is the same person, of course I can be wrong then I will apologize and remove this instantly.

Seeing the title of this thread got me interested in this, but after reading to the point of seeing this statement you wrote above got me discouraged because truth be told, everybody on this forum is a suspect of one thing or the other, of which I expected you to have waited until you may have gotten full solid proof to back up your suspicion before creating this thread. Because until proven otherwise, those user remains a suspect who deserves no negative nor neutral trust rating, because the fact that they speak the same language, and received merit from one account to the other is not enough to prove they are connected.

##That's my point of view##

[sheenshane]

They should be banned with this proof of @Stalker22 since one of his alt account has been already banned.

Proof:

3NEabgbcpYWLV9QnGGcZPmUNEKSpYkPqNf

https://ninjastic.space/post/61609316

~
Bitcoin Address: 3NEabgbcpYWLV9QnGGcZPmUNEKSpYkPqNf

3NEabgbcpYWLV9QnGGcZPmUNEKSpYkPqNf

~
3NEabgbcpYWLV9QnGGcZPmUNEKSpYkPqNf

As of now, there's nothing you can do, every one of us here in the forum will do stupidity even a reputable member will end up potentially scammed.  So right now, this thread is enough to warn everyone here to avoid scams. 

[Timelord2067]

Humbertin uses the expression

Code:

Hellow

from time to time - especially if their current profile has been active for six or more months.

Check the creation dates (or woken up etc) of anyone seemingly having a successful trade.

[avp2306]

You cannot prove anything by just suspecting them to be a scam. Just collect some evidence yet and once you get enough then post a scam accusation here to warn people about those upcoming scam that might happen. If the crime is already happen to someone else then help the victims by providing the necessary proof so that he can file a case to sue those scammers.

But since you seems to have a good trace right there I guess this case need to look at to see if there's a crime committed.

[Timelord2067]

You cannot prove anything by just suspecting them to be a scam. Just collect some evidence yet and once you get enough then post a scam accusation here to warn people about those upcoming scam that might happen. If the crime is already happen to someone else then help the victims by providing the necessary proof so that he can file a case to sue those scammers.

But since you seems to have a good trace right there I guess this case need to look at to see if there's a crime committed.

At least we know which Hhampuz to trust:

Trust list for: avp2306 (Trust: awaiting update) (26 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP) (created 2023-06-17_Sat_05.07h)
Back to index

avp2306 Trusts these users' judgement:
1. NEW HhampuzZ (Trust: awaiting update) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

avp2306 Distrusts these users' judgement:
-

avp2306's judgement is Trusted by:
-

~avp2306's judgement is Distrusted by:
-

Source: LoyceV's Trust list viewer.
Get your own Trust list in BBCode at loyce.club/trust.

[CYBER_COWBOY]

You cannot prove anything by just suspecting them to be a scam. Just collect some evidence yet and once you get enough then post a scam accusation here to warn people about those upcoming scam that might happen. If the crime is already happen to someone else then help the victims by providing the necessary proof so that he can file a case to sue those scammers.

But since you seems to have a good trace right there I guess this case need to look at to see if there's a crime committed.

I agree in everything what you said here. I cannot prove anything and that is right because i just suspect so the thing I can do and did is to warn people. You have 100% right  
But just I thinking like this is better to prevent a scam from maybe happen instead of wait until it happen and then post that the scam have happen, because I think this scammer wont care, just create a new account and not pay back the money he/she scammed the victim of, this seems to be a person that has create many alts and scam a lot of people to get this one out of the forum could do a little change to the positive.
If the account MadHatters have honest intentions then it should be no problem to show that in the future trades with using a reliable escrow provider or go first with a member that have good feedback and if so happens a couple of times, this all will be removed and apologized.

[examplens]

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.

[LoyceV]

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

Depending on the case, I've used it:

Far too many red flags. I advise to stay away from this user, it looks like an exit scam waiting to happen. See Reference link.

This user lies, and I don't trust him. I think this is an exit scam waiting to happen, and I advise anyone not to trust their website.
See Reference link.

dkbit98 is right: this guy can't answer simple questions. He avoids them, and lies hoping to dismiss you. I don't trust him, and recommend to avoid his website. See Reference link.

In OP's case, people should really stop trusting Newbies. Whoever sends money first to a Newbie can't be helped. To quote upper management:

Honestly, I think that someone that naïve can't be protected. Even if every inch of the page had been full of warnings, he still might've fallen for it, since he wasn't even thinking about the possibility of being given evil instructions. The scammer was a Jr Member, not some Legendary.

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

If I am almost positive that a person on this forum soon will scam somebody, what should I do?

First try to avoid such person because people like that have nothing and wouldn't mind spoiling what you have, then study such person from a far without giving him any feelings that you're on his track studying him till one day he will launch an attack and you will have enough evidence to use against him.

The problem is that the person has not scammed anyone yet! But I am pretty sure it's just a matter of time.

Watch and observe him as I've said, have enough evidence to use as reference against him whenever you got him caught doing the act and use those evidence as to report him to the moderators or post it on a scam accusation thread.

[rby]

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.

[LoyceV]

When you connect accounts through their writing style just as FatFork did, we will say it's not an evidence enough.  Maybe a coincidence

It depends: FatFork quoted a few posts with 5 of the same words, tspacepilot used his "training in Statistical Methods for Natural Language Processing" to do a thorough analysis to find patterns.

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;

Based on all this, would you say LoyceMobile is my alt? The writing style is different (because 90% of the posts were written on a keyboard smaller than my drink), I never sent Merit to it, and I use the account at different times (and locations). That only leaves the same local board, which I barely use anyway and could easily avoid if I wanted to.