Ⓜ️ MoBit.Exchange - Anonymous Exchange 💠 Escrow 0.25 BTC 💠

[SamReomo]

Why slap a "scam" label on it right away?
If there have been successful exchanges since then, users could simply be warned that the project has an outstanding transaction of a certain dollar amount. A "scam" is when a project defrauds all its users, or at the very least, when there are multiple complaints.

Only one person left a negative feedback and team Monerica put that scam label on the exchange without any proper investigation. Although representative of Mobit soon solved the issue of the user and then replied to that negative feedback but still they put that label and didn't left it. After input from the users of Bitcointalk who contacted team Monerica support/owners then the scam label was lifted. I suggest team Monerica to be more active at pages of the services that they add and not to put scam label without proper investigation.

[Faisal2202]

Why slap a "scam" label on it right away?
If there have been successful exchanges since then, users could simply be warned that the project has an outstanding transaction of a certain dollar amount. A "scam" is when a project defrauds all its users, or at the very least, when there are multiple complaints.

Only one person left a negative feedback and team Monerica put that scam label on the exchange without any proper investigation. Although representative of Mobit soon solved the issue of the user and then replied to that negative feedback but still they put that label and didn't left it. After input from the users of Bitcointalk who contacted team Monerica support/owners then the scam label was lifted. I suggest team Monerica to be more active at pages of the services that they add and not to put scam label without proper investigation.

Monerica has around 1,307 projects listed, and you know how hard it can be for them to manually check every case, so they have four statuses to warn people about the project if anything happens. Now what happened here needs to be investigated if that's so important, and to do that we need a timeline, date, time, etc. to find out how much time that person made that feedback on Monerica.

It can be intentional or a real one, not raising any real accusations, just a second thought. But the first one is that someone made an exchange, and the platform failed to deliver what they promised, and that's why Monerica tagged them as a scam according to their FAQ. So, the scam status is the last resort for them. I don't remember if they first changed it to questionable status, then scam, or what their procedure was. I tried checking the archive to see if there was any change, but did not find anything. But you should not forget that the Mobit team replied to the person after several days, so monerica did not know, while the person who made the accusation knew and it was his/her responsibility to put a good word there.

🟦Admitted — Added to the directory but not tested by the community
✅Verified — Tested by at least one member of the community
❓Questionable — Uncertainty around claims or service reliability, but no confirmed reports of theft
❌Scam — Credible evidence that the service has taken user funds without delivering the promised product or service

[TypoTonic]

Now what happened here needs to be investigated if that's so important, and to do that we need a timeline, date, time, etc. to find out how much time that person made that feedback on Monerica.

He posted the review on August 30 at around 11 UTC. I'm assuming he's also the one who submitted the scam status revision, and a note saying "User transaction not processed". Both were approved at around 16 and 23 UTC respectively, so Mobit didn't really have much time to resolve the issue before they were labeled as "scam". The guy was a bit too hasty IMO, but perhaps Mobit can also try to improve their customer support to avoid issues like this in the future.

I don't remember if they first changed it to questionable status, then scam, or what their procedure was. I tried checking the archive to see if there was any change, but did not find anything. But you should not forget that the Mobit team replied to the person after several days, so monerica did not know, while the person who made the accusation knew and it was his/her responsibility to put a good word there.

That doesn't seem to be the case, looking at the listing's entire change history: https://app.monerica.com/history/1908
It's mainly his responsibility, but anyone can also submit a revision request if they see anything out of date.

[SamReomo]

Monerica has around 1,307 projects listed, and you know how hard it can be for them to manually check every case, so they have four statuses to warn people about the project if anything happens. Now what happened here needs to be investigated if that's so important, and to do that we need a timeline, date, time, etc. to find out how much time that person made that feedback on Monerica.

I know it's not easy to look for 1307 projects that are listed but it's also not fair to label a service as scam without proper investigation. I think they should have some protocol to check services themselves before putting any label.

Instead of putting that scam label they should just label users having issues on the platform that will warn users but won't create any issues for a genuine service.

That would still be better and once a platform's representative replies they should at least have a way to look for such replies even a bot could look for such replies these days by reading reply of the representatives to notify them whether the issue was resolved or not.

[hugeblack]

🟦Admitted — Added to the directory but not tested by the community
✅Verified — Tested by at least one member of the community
❓Questionable — Uncertainty around claims or service reliability, but no confirmed reports of theft
❌Scam — Credible evidence that the service has taken user funds without delivering the promised product or service

It appears that a single case is enough to label the service a scam; the matter was resolved with the community's support, and if anyone notices similar cases, they should report them here. Had we not discussed this issue, the "scam" tag would have persisted for a long time.

[Faisal2202]

He posted the review on August 30 at around 11 UTC. I'm assuming he's also the one who submitted the scam status revision, and a note saying "User transaction not processed". Both were approved at around 16 and 23 UTC respectively, so Mobit didn't really have much time to resolve the issue before they were labeled as "scam". The guy was a bit too hasty IMO, but perhaps Mobit can also try to improve their customer support to avoid issues like this in the future.

Can't agree more, usually I would have done the same but after getting my funds back, I would have changed, deleted, or whatever I could do to make it right. I would have done it. Anyway, we can only focus on ourselves, people like this come and go. Mobit had to be a little active in this as well, not just the community alone.

That would still be better and once a platform's representative replies they should at least have a way to look for such replies even a bot could look for such replies these days by reading reply of the representatives to notify them whether the issue was resolved or not.

Even if they have used AI, they won't be able to confirm it because they gave the tag of "scam" at 2026-08-30 16:12 UTC, and Mobit replied back on his post on 2026-09-19.

It appears that a single case is enough to label the service a scam; the matter was resolved with the community's support, and if anyone notices similar cases, they should report them here. Had we not discussed this issue, the "scam" tag would have persisted for a long time.

Exactly, the team should have dealt with it earlier, otherwise, it would not have persisted this long. Anyway, this proved one thing, that monerica can give a scam tag even in a single case, so why wait for more (obviously).

[decodx]

It appears that a single case is enough to label the service a scam; the matter was resolved with the community's support, and if anyone notices similar cases, they should report them here. Had we not discussed this issue, the "scam" tag would have persisted for a long time.

Exactly, the team should have dealt with it earlier, otherwise, it would not have persisted this long. Anyway, this proved one thing, that monerica can give a scam tag even in a single case, so why wait for more (obviously).

If I were in their shoes and managing a directory like that, I would at least try to contact the service provider to hear the other side of the story. It turns out that anyone can submit a negative review, even a fake one, and they will label that service as a scam. That makes no sense to me.

Branded as a scam over one unverified report is completely lazy. Resolution or not, jumping to conclusions without fact-checking ruins real businesses. A platform shouldn't run on hearsay.

[masulum]

Even if they have used AI, they won't be able to confirm it because they gave the tag of "scam" at 2026-08-30 16:12 UTC, and Mobit replied back on his post on 2026-09-19.

no matter what, i will say this is not good when a service takes too long to answer customer complaints. When someone tags the services as a scam, the issue should be resolved immediately, and the team should not let these accusations drag on for too long, now the proof is disapear. It’s quite unfortunate how the team failed to quickly respond from the site. Even though their statement mentioned that the issue was resolved the day after the report was filed, they should have updated the post accordingly with proof archive. This would help remove any doubts in the future. however, maybe the team not focus on monerica pages, if this is the reason to take for too long to respons on that sites, it still acceptable, but in the future, they need to recheck the pages everyday to make sure no more delay to response user complaints. well good job for mobit team, at least make a good decision to reply that report even waiting for few days from day 1 complaint posts.

[safar1980]

If I were in their shoes and managing a directory like that, I would at least try to contact the service provider to hear the other side of the story. It turns out that anyone can submit a negative review, even a fake one, and they will label that service as a scam. That makes no sense to me.

Branded as a scam over one unverified report is completely lazy. Resolution or not, jumping to conclusions without fact-checking ruins real businesses. A platform shouldn't run on hearsay.

If a platform hosts over 1,300 projects, the service would have to hire an entire team of specialists) I assumed that once a project is registered on the platform, it would receive email notifications about negative reviews, allowing project representatives to respond quickly to such complaints.

[SamReomo]

Even if they have used AI, they won't be able to confirm it because they gave the tag of "scam" at 2026-08-30 16:12 UTC, and Mobit replied back on his post on 2026-09-19.

Then what's use of a platform which doesn't have ability to fix the status on time even if representative of the accused platform has come up with clarification?

I think they should improve their platform and they should never add scam flag for platforms without proper investigation. If they add scam flag status only if a user leaves a negative feedback and says funds block then such isn't a sign of a good service.

[Faisal2202]

If I were in their shoes and managing a directory like that, I would at least try to contact the service provider to hear the other side of the story. It turns out that anyone can submit a negative review, even a fake one, and they will label that service as a scam. That makes no sense to me.

Branded as a scam over one unverified report is completely lazy. Resolution or not, jumping to conclusions without fact-checking ruins real businesses. A platform shouldn't run on hearsay.

Exactly, I would have done the same, but it must have something to do with their policy, although I am not sure how someone can fake it because you are required to give proper proof. But what this guy did here is, he did not wait for a reply, although I am not even sure how much he used for this exchange that he did it anyway. No one is blaming anyone here, and I hope Monerica will take this into account next time.

no matter what, i will say this is not good when a service takes too long to answer customer complaints. When someone tags the services as a scam, the issue should be resolved immediately, and the team should not let these accusations drag on for too long, now the proof is disapear. It’s quite unfortunate how the team failed to quickly respond from the site. ...

Yes, they should have stayed active on their Monerica page, and this will definitely be an improvement they won't miss next time, but the member who reported that fast should be taken into account too. It's an open platform, anyone can do anything, no one is supporting anyone here, but still, if someone faced a little problem and contacted the team and the problem was solved eventually, then that member should take the responsibility to edit or delete it or reply to it again.

Anyway, the case is closed now. Btw, you asked about the order ID disappearing, that's because after 15 days, they delete such data.

Then what's use of a platform which doesn't have ability to fix the status on time even if representative of the accused platform has come up with clarification?

I think they should improve their platform and they should never add scam flag for platforms without proper investigation. If they add scam flag status only if a user leaves a negative feedback and says funds block then such isn't a sign of a good service.

Can't agree more, Monerica did not use their second last status of "Questionable" as I shared before. They should have given some time to the team to react. BTW, I also want to know how they can notify the project team if something comes up? It's a privacy concerned platform, so it's not like you log in with an email and get a notification.

[examplens]

no matter what, i will say this is not good when a service takes too long to answer customer complaints. When someone tags the services as a scam, the issue should be resolved immediately, and the team should not let these accusations drag on for too long, now the proof is disapear. It’s quite unfortunate how the team failed to quickly respond from the site. ...

Yes, they should have stayed active on their Monerica page, and this will definitely be an improvement they won't miss next time, but the member who reported that fast should be taken into account too. It's an open platform, anyone can do anything, no one is supporting anyone here, but still, if someone faced a little problem and contacted the team and the problem was solved eventually, then that member should take the responsibility to edit or delete it or reply to it again.

Currently, we have quite a lot of "review" sites, where customers can leave their experience. For one service, keeping track of them all becomes almost a nightmare.
We have seen similar things here on the forum, someone register new acc, opens a scam accusation, and never appears again to confirm whether it is resolved.

[logfiles]

Currently, we have quite a lot of "review" sites, where customers can leave their experience. For one service, keeping track of them all becomes almost a nightmare.
We have seen similar things here on the forum, someone register new acc, opens a scam accusation, and never appears again to confirm whether it is resolved.

Maybe they can change the approach and let say try to do it the casinoguru way by having a team of folks look through the reviews and also invite the accused to say something before a conclusion is made. There could be a time frame given to the accused and the accuser to respond. When the time passes, the verdict is made accordingly.

[SamReomo]

Can't agree more, Monerica did not use their second last status of "Questionable" as I shared before. They should have given some time to the team to react. BTW, I also want to know how they can notify the project team if something comes up? It's a privacy concerned platform, so it's not like you log in with an email and get a notification.

They as a platform should have some members who should contact the services that users report instead of directly giving those services scam status.

It's not hard to contact privacy services because many of those offer support and contacts and as representative of a platform it's mandatory step to contact accused platform's support team before giving them scam status.

Instead of directly putting scam label on a platform they should contact the accused platform as mediator and such approach will make them more trustworthy as well.

[Faisal2202]

Currently, we have quite a lot of "review" sites, where customers can leave their experience. For one service, keeping track of them all becomes almost a nightmare.
We have seen similar things here on the forum, someone register new acc, opens a scam accusation, and never appears again to confirm whether it is resolved.

Exactly examplens, and other platforms/directories should also be checked and they all have their own ways of managing such matters. That's why a new customer always reads reviews from multiple sources, not just one.

When the time passes, the verdict is made accordingly.

Can't agree more.

Instead of directly putting scam label on a platform they should contact the accused platform as mediator and such approach will make them more trustworthy as well.

IDK maybe this is too much asking, anyway as I said IDK about their current way of communicating besides the fact that I know, this is too much expectation but I completely agree with this as if it can be implemented then it should be.

[examplens]

Maybe they can change the approach and let say try to do it the casinoguru way by having a team of folks look through the reviews and also invite the accused to say something before a conclusion is made. There could be a time frame given to the accused and the accuser to respond. When the time passes, the verdict is made accordingly.

A team of people is an additional expense, and it requires a lot of money to cover the involvement in arranging and mediating these cases. Of course, that money should not be minimal, because it would be easy for an exchanger to pay for a mild criticism.
It is possible that it is feasible in the gambling industry, but with exchangers that operate with a 0.5% service fee, it is much more difficult.

[masulum]

Currently, we have quite a lot of "review" sites, where customers can leave their experience. For one service, keeping track of them all becomes almost a nightmare.
We have seen similar things here on the forum, someone register new acc, opens a scam accusation, and never appears again to confirm whether it is resolved.

But in a business, the assessment is different. just like in the case you mentioned, people might create an account just to post a review or a thread accusing the company scammed users and never comeback. if it’s a fake review, the company clarification becomes important. the company can issue a clarification on the same day or in the next days stating that the allegation is under investigation. If the allegation is found as false/fake accusation, the company can issue a statement confirming that the user claims are untrue, backed by evidence from the company. In this way, fake reviews can be minimized as long as the company actively monitors allegations and responds as quickly as possible. because an action like this necessary to keep company reputations clean from any fake accusations.

[Taskford]

Currently, we have quite a lot of "review" sites, where customers can leave their experience. For one service, keeping track of them all becomes almost a nightmare.
We have seen similar things here on the forum, someone register new acc, opens a scam accusation, and never appears again to confirm whether it is resolved.

But in a business, the assessment is different. just like in the case you mentioned, people might create an account just to post a review or a thread accusing the company scammed users and never comeback. if it’s a fake review, the company clarification becomes important. the company can issue a clarification on the same day or in the next days stating that the allegation is under investigation. If the allegation is found as false/fake accusation, the company can issue a statement confirming that the user claims are untrue, backed by evidence from the company. In this way, fake reviews can be minimized as long as the company actively monitors allegations and responds as quickly as possible. because an action like this necessary to keep company reputations clean from any fake accusations.

This is how important their reaction towards those accusations posted against them, since their response and also evidence will just show that they are the one in good side and this is also how they could protect their reputation.

If they are silent towards the accusation posted against them, this will spread fast because. their critics will just create new account to spread more fire.

Their possible quick response could possibly stop and discourage any further fake accusation against their platform.

[SamReomo]

IDK maybe this is too much asking, anyway as I said IDK about their current way of communicating besides the fact that I know, this is too much expectation but I completely agree with this as if it can be implemented then it should be.

Yes, I agree! Since Mobit status is changed at that site so we should wind up this discussion here and if their representative ever finds our conversation he/she should consider those suggestions. Hope to see MoBit exchange getting more success for the services they provide.

Any good service has rivals and sometimes rivals post fake accusations as well but a reliable service can keep going despite having so many rivals. Best of luck to Mobit exchange for their efforts and for providing such useful services!

[yugenz]

All orders, including yours, have been completed successfully.

Delays are mostly due to technical reasons relating to the Monero privacy protocol. Monero enforces a 10-block lock time on wallet outputs after every outgoing transaction. This issue can be partially mitigated by using additional sending wallets (which we do), but during times of high volume, the queue can still take several hours to clear.

We are continuing to optimize our wallet management and improve our service, and thank you for your ongoing feedback. Please continue to let us know how your experience with our platform goes.

Exchanges are still very slow. My latest exchanges are still queued after almost one day.