Topic: AntiDolos extortion/scam - page 3. (Read 710 times)

They need to be honest because they are risking losing followers and about where they are going to get funds to maintain and make a profit from their reviews, there is such a thing as an affiliate, take the case of gambling reviews if the operators of these gambling review sites are honest, they are likely to get more active referrals from casinos, people first look on how honest the reviews are before joining, in the case of ICO or NFT they should still honesty and factual in their reviews and just put a disclaimer that they are putting honest reviews whether they pay to get a listing or not.

There is no such honest rating website. How would you think they get their business or even pay for the hosting and website maintainence?

I see that he did something similar in the past with the Ideaology project in this thread: Is Ideaology.io scam or a great opportunity? [archive]

First, he published a very negative review claiming that the project was too risky and worthless, with an amateur and inexperienced team.

However, after just under a month, he completely changed his story and deleted (or denied) almost all of his claims from the original review, ultimately giving the project a high 8.5/10 rating. Now, I don't know if the owners of the Ideaology project paid for a positive review, and that will be hard to prove unless they publicly admit it themselves, but realistically, what could cause such a drastic change of opinion in such a short time? If you're going to write reviews, at least try to be objective and free of personal biases so you don't have to contradict your own words.


And, according to the date stated, that update was made only a week after Amar Kovacevic from Ideaology publicly accused them of abuse and blackmail.

I looked at this site a bit, they are completely irrelevant, and the statistics on their site say so. Obviously, the business idea here is to charge for "good reviews" for new ICOs and NFTs.


@-CryptoViking- create a red flag on this profile, it will mark the account more visibly.

I second this. It's a common practice, but only if you know you can't get a higher score.

E.g. if someone would give Stake a 10/10 and me a 7/10 because I don't have a specific service or provider, then that's cool, I know I can't compete with Stake.
But if someone would intentionally give me 2/10 although we both know that I'm a 7/10, and then asking for more money to get me up, then I would complain.

Additionally, if the person had previous scam accusations then I would lean more on to the "ok I'm getting scammed here" side.

The extortion also came in form of fake review.

They're giving OP a preview of the draft they'll publish in case OP refused to pay. I peeked at their review page and see that there's no article yet about BKS, so I think the screenshot given by them --and from them, posted by OP here-- is indeed the draft.



Given its a false information which will be published if OP refuse to pay, I think that can be considered as an extortion and not how most --honest-- rating website works.

This is getting interesting the disclaimer is for readers to make the readers believe that they are independent and transparent and they are not doing paid reviews but based on the screenshots provided by OP
They just betrayed themselves, they have to go here to defend themselves or they will get tagged and their platform exposed for extortion.
This is the malpractice of many ICO reviewers, they are not going to just help projects, there's always money involved.
 

I saw some of the older AntiDolos reviews and I suspected that he is a shitty and lazy scambuster (I even warned him few months ago that he has to provide some proof for his claims) but it looks like his main goal is not to protect ignorant investors but to actually profit from this by offering higher rating for money.


True, we all know how these rating sites work but in my eyes AntiDolos is even worse because he presented himself here as someone who exposes scams while it looks like that is secondary thing to them and instead they are just another shitty rating site like ICObench that can't be trusted.

By the way, I found an interesting claim on their website. So much about being non profit media.  




I am really looking forward to hear what he can say in his defense.

But do you think that a $1k review by one service can turn such a scam project into a legit one? What is the actual potential value of your project and is your visibility marketing budget lower than $1k?

If the antidolos (unpublished) claim is untrue, then there is no need to worry about any blackmail here and move on. However I'm still curious about the antidolos investigation of this project. hehe

Yes, but when OP declined or ignore the offer they published negative reviews of the project, will they publish that review if the project did get their service, they have a lot of projects that they've reviewed did they do the same, offering their service and when they declined they publish bad feedbacks.
They have a lot of explaining to do, or people will doubt their reviews if it's coming from extortion or if these projects really believe in their service.

Yeah I see it, but that doesn't look like a threat or extortion scam to me.
We all know how most rating websites work, you pay more and you get higher rankings, nothing new about that.

Based on their post they are here to expose scam ICO and NFT https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/antidolos-2838673 and you have become their target to backup and shill their platform for you to get their service yes there's extortion on this if they cannot prove that what they are posting is not true
This is bad business and unethical if they are propagating false information just to promote their service I support @Jerome Tash call to explain their side here, and prove they're right about publishing their reviews about your platform.

Well you can see the screenshot from Telegram, in which he asks for money to provide an 8+ review instead of 6.4 or whatever. I literally have the entire chat log saved with entire communications exchange in which I shared entire pitch deck with all the legal documentation about the company, Hacken audits on all tech and smart contracts, Legal opinions and all the documentation that goes to serious investors before they make a decision about investment so he can see that everything we do is more then real and true. Which I don't see the reason to post here, he can do it if he saved it, even though none of it is for public, but for investors at this stage.

Anyway it is clearly visible what he is doing and if anyone does the research on what we are and what we are doing as a company, pretty fast all his claims turn to baseless claims and open grounds for a lawsuit, if we thought that his false claims could harm our business, which we don't.

I posted this only so he doesn't do this to other people.

It's not that I don't trust your claims, but if you are going to post stuff like this about bitcointalk member than you better provide some proof of conversation and threats.
This can be posted as redacted screenshots from email, telegram or other services you used for conversation.
I would also like to hear AntiDolos side of story before making any decision here.

Not that I am a big fan of NFTs, IDOs, IEOSs ICOs… you name it, but this looks like a clear extortion attempt.

I would like @AntiDolos to come to this thread and tell us why they are asking for money in exchange for a higher review score. Failure to do so in a couple of day means I will leave them a negative rating and even create a support a flag against their profile.

What happened: AntiDolos tried to extort me by publishing bullshit review of a project where I am Co-Founder and if I pay $1000 they would give us a much higher rating. In his review that is not public yet he made a lot of false accusations, from having fake team members to faking partnerships which is just not true. Article is not yet published on their website and we got preview version of it and I guess they wanted to wait and see whether we gonna give them $1000.

Website: https://antidolos.com/
User: AntiDolos

Backstage website https://bksbackstage.io/

One of his claims is that we (Backstage) are falsely advertising partnerships with parties that we have no connections whatsoever and that's simply not true.




For example, this is a tweet from Haash verified official account with 5.6 million followers where they mention Backstage as a place where you can buy VIP Meet & Greet tickets for their North America tour.

Backstage marketplace https://www.bkstage.io/


https://twitter.com/haashoficial/status/1643048481836212228?t=tnXS_HRgy33HPC8QbDgtTg&s=19


In the top right corner you can see Backstage logo as we are partners with Aspendos which is an ancient theater in Turkey that hosts shows of top world stars like Placido Domingo.


https://www.aspendos.live/


Professional UFC fighter Kelvin Gastelum published on his official Instagram account with more than 500k followers about being Backstage ambassador.


https://www.instagram.com/p/CerdfsiPj3a/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=


Telegram message where AntiDolos asks $1000 for higher rating


His telegram username @Antidolos_admin


One of the more ridiculous claims is that we "don't have token yet" while we actually wanted to fully develop business before launching the token and that's exactly why so many tokens failed-they have nothing behind it while we have a real business that is already bringing revenue and we are not in hurry to publish token and dump it on investors like majority of others are doing.




I could go on but I think that this is enough to prove that AntiDolos has no clue what he is talking about, didn't make a proper research and has no honest intention to protect the community.
I couldn't even care less about his review if he didn't try to actually extort me and that's when I decided to publish this so the same thing won't happen to others.

If you want to do your own research about Backstage, you can start here:

https://t.co/7165whXYbL