Topic: Wapinter related with Scam? Why he repeat to promote ICO with fake team ? - page 2. (Read 18585 times)
July 12, 2018, 04:04:59 AM
removed
July 07, 2018, 04:25:15 PM
I think Wapinter It's not fault hi have a lot project hard to keep track of all this.
Who told him to accept all offer, researching simple fact don't take much time. If he just check basic thing, he can easily opt out mostly scam.
July 07, 2018, 02:07:19 PM
Can you check the pictures on Coinect? Another shady ICO posted by Wapinter.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/annico-coinect-thread-locked-due-to-ongoing-scam-accusations-4419682
Names sound really fake.
https://ore5.jp/archives/5859https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/annico-coinect-thread-locked-due-to-ongoing-scam-accusations-4419682
Names sound really fake.
I need translator for this one. Who is this guy:
Which one is real?
Not sure man, these glasses don't look the same on pictures.
Wait, don't tell me. He got old but he wears the same old white t-shirt.
Oh wait....don't tell me.
春山 充 Haruyama Mitsuru ? Nah....probably google translator stopped responding. This has to be Jason Zhou, Python developer.
Here is another confirmation/validation from Amazon Face "Rekognition":
July 07, 2018, 01:55:55 PM
I think Wapinter It's not fault hi have a lot project hard to keep track of all this.
Hard to keep track on the scams or hard to keep track on the money he/she is making?
June 22, 2018, 09:21:48 PM
If a project turns out to be a scam, and they're in the middle of running a campaign, I think it's enough for a manager to do as Yahoo62278 just did and end the campaign. Basically it comes down to the question of whether we're assuming a project is a scam until proven otherwise or legitimate until proven to be a scam. There have been enough scams such that we probably ought to be assuming all ICOs are, but I don't think it's a campaign manager's duty to expose them before taking on the job of manager.
Agreed, what you all said, but how bounty manager can accept ICO which offering 40% monthly return. It's clear sign of scammy nature of ICO, there is no way any project can give 40% return monthly on consistently. Did he read at all or just negotiated his fee without checking what is the project and whom behind it?
I don't think, he did read it at all or he did read and don't care about anything, just wanted to earn his fee.
As a bounty manager sometime we really can't filter scammy ICO because it is fool proof or really good in everything. But Coinect ICO had fix high monthly return that is clear sign of Scam. How any bounty manager can miss that?
I am probably the most impartial person on this forum, as my life isn't only about this forum or a single person. And this is a statement which I strongly support.
June 22, 2018, 05:04:59 PM
Why blaming me for the scam ICOs?Am I not co operating with anyone who reports a scam ICO?I immediately lock their threads.For the past few days I am being constantly targetted on this forum.I have publicly expressed my willingness to help fight these scam ICOs.I suggested we should have a group of members who do research before ICOs are allowed to post their ANN and bounty.I accept I made a wrong choice in megatron and xeonframe case but I was not a part of them.My fault I didnt do proper research before accepting these bounties but I locked their threads immediately as soon as I learnt about them.Lets fight these scam ICOs together.I assure everyone that I will be more vigilant in accepting the bounty campaigns from now on.
First I want to clear that, no one targetting you. Specially I am not. Even I don't know you. I haven't yet joined any bounty. I am not yet manager of any bounty. So I am not your competition's. I just saw about some scam post and there 2 of your bounty I found I have already mention on my thread. Another also found recently. According to you here should a team for investigate. Why not did yourselves? At least team ? It will take only 10 minutes for Google check. So how you expect from other will investigate on behalf of managers ?
According to me :
- If managers not research minimum , they deserve red tag or ban ( if multiple).
- If participant not research they deserves loss of hard worked time
- If investor not research, they deserve loss
BTW I hope from now you will research well. I have no problem with you or any managers. I just try to help people from scam site. I will do it also future.
June 21, 2018, 07:09:27 PM
We can actually see so many miss handled campaigns and end up scamming but guess what only unreputed managers get tag and those reputed wanna bee which hunts for fee's evade the tagging and just burried the issue while DT afraid to sue them up.
June 21, 2018, 07:07:00 PM
If a project turns out to be a scam, and they're in the middle of running a campaign, I think it's enough for a manager to do as Yahoo62278 just did and end the campaign. Basically it comes down to the question of whether we're assuming a project is a scam until proven otherwise or legitimate until proven to be a scam. There have been enough scams such that we probably ought to be assuming all ICOs are, but I don't think it's a campaign manager's duty to expose them before taking on the job of manager.
I don't know what came on your mind that managers don't have the duty to research the project if that one is scam or not while the fact is they are the one who's main involve of everything since they are the one who's running the advertisement campaign for that scammy one's. Managers should be the first defense against scam so that no casualties happen and also Managers who have high ranks and reputation can attract investors so they must do their due diligence to know if the project is legit or not.
June 21, 2018, 05:47:20 PM
If a project turns out to be a scam, and they're in the middle of running a campaign, I think it's enough for a manager to do as Yahoo62278 just did and end the campaign. Basically it comes down to the question of whether we're assuming a project is a scam until proven otherwise or legitimate until proven to be a scam. There have been enough scams such that we probably ought to be assuming all ICOs are, but I don't think it's a campaign manager's duty to expose them before taking on the job of manager.
Agreed, what you all said, but how bounty manager can accept ICO which offering 40% monthly return. It's clear sign of scammy nature of ICO, there is no way any project can give 40% return monthly on consistently. Did he read at all or just negotiated his fee without checking what is the project and whom behind it?
I don't think, he did read it at all or he did read and don't care about anything, just wanted to earn his fee.
As a bounty manager sometime we really can't filter scammy ICO because it is fool proof or really good in everything. But Coinect ICO had fix high monthly return that is clear sign of Scam. How any bounty manager can miss that?
I am probably the most impartial person on this forum, as my life isn't only about this forum or a single person. And this is a statement which I strongly support.
June 21, 2018, 04:57:24 PM
You and your friends have dirt on your hands too, I could dig deeper but no need.
You should have. (*Hint : You have already hit the bottom)I have nothing personal against you, but before accusing someone of something make sure you are clean yourself. Why didn't you make your research as signature campaign OP before starting a sig campaign for a scammy project?
Oh he's clean.Very clean. I was one of the members who created the ANN thread and acted as a Development Manager for the project.Technically, you should directing your queries towards me and not the escrows involved.You went from defending Wapinter to attacking Lutpin. Must admit you are taking it way too personally. 
June 21, 2018, 01:58:35 PM
You and your friends have dirt on your hands too, I could dig deeper but no need.
I'm sorry, is this the best "dirt" you could find on me?A campaign where I did everything I could to secure a BTC payment for participants, since the ASC they were supposed to get was going to be worthless due to the screwup by the ASC team.
I did my part there. I promptly joined the discussion with the escrow team and coordinated further steps with them. Not for myself, but for the people I had enrolled.
Investors? Covered and fully repaid by the escrow team.
Signature Campaign Participants? Compensated in BTC, which they were all happy to accept and not one of them complained about.
To sum it up in one sentence:
No one, apart from one of the scammers, lost money from that scam.
Now do we see Wapinter out there busting his ass, trying to get a payment for the participants of his latest campaigns? Will those be covered, will the participants be paid in any way?
June 21, 2018, 01:31:20 PM
You wouldn't get banned for having an alt account. You could get banned for plagiarism.
Moonie, stop spoiling my surprises.https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17530692
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ascendancy-ipo-turned-into-a-scam-investigation-in-progress-1749935
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ascendancy-scam-claiming-back-investments-has-ended-1778405
You and your friends have dirt on your hands too, I could dig deeper but no need. I have nothing personal against you, but before accusing someone of something make sure you are clean yourself. Why didn't you make your research as signature campaign OP before starting a sig campaign for a scammy project?
No one, apart from one of the scammers lost money from that scam.
June 21, 2018, 01:25:42 PM
You wouldn't get banned for having an alt account. You could get banned for plagiarism.
Moonie, stop spoiling my surprises.https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17530692
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ascendancy-ipo-turned-into-a-scam-investigation-in-progress-1749935
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ascendancy-scam-claiming-back-investments-has-ended-1778405
You and your friends have dirt on your hands too, I could dig deeper but no need. I have nothing personal against you, but before accusing someone of something make sure you are clean yourself. Why didn't you make your research as signature campaign OP before starting a sig campaign for a scammy project?
June 21, 2018, 11:25:15 AM
You wouldn't get banned for having an alt account. You could get banned for plagiarism.
Moonie, stop spoiling my surprises. 
June 21, 2018, 11:13:37 AM
[...]
So to me, the filtering criteria is... Go with a manager who has good reputation, who already proved him/her in the community etc. Of-course don't forget to do your own part (a little research) once you get accepted.
So to me, the filtering criteria is... Go with a manager who has good reputation, who already proved him/her in the community etc. Of-course don't forget to do your own part (a little research) once you get accepted.
I am on the same note with this, I usually took bounty manager as a point of consideration when I look for bounty campaign as I assume they have at least read and study about the ICO whose bounty they managed. Afterall, they have reputation to maintain.
And although Wapinter is not the only manager that fell into this situation, he's somehow the first that I know that got several scam ico at the same time, which made me wonder if he even study about the campaign he managed or he just blindly accept every campaign offered to him. Especially because he had this team of managers that gave me an impression that he took an ICO and gave it to his team to handle.
June 21, 2018, 11:12:47 AM
The wording .... LMFAO PLEASE but I insist, IF you are suggesting that my account is shared or anyone EVER used my account to post, I hereby invite forum admins to check my IPs and if it was used by anyone else I will gladly accept to be banned. IF not, you should add yourself negative trust and ask all your noobcakes army that post for you to give you negative trust for talking crap and putting dirt on someone's reputation.
You wouldn't get banned for having an alt account. You could get banned for plagiarism.
June 21, 2018, 10:19:05 AM
Nobody is promoting scams, as you can very well see, he closed the campaign.
Indeed, nobody is promoting any scam because the bounty threads for all scams mentioned in OP are closed.Like the thread for xeonframe, which is lock...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3963215.msg40587785;topicseen#msg40587785
wait, it's not locked? That would mean, people are currently promoting a...I don't wanna say it.
Top job designing those signatures, btw.
Thanks, appreciate it. IF you ever need a signature designer don't hesitate to contact me.
You can find me here in this list too for future reference if you need it: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/overview-of-bitcointalk-designerssignatureavataretc-last-update-15-aug-2018-1610428
June 21, 2018, 08:18:16 AM
Just because the managers do research, doesn't mean participants should not do their own research anymore (I have discussed that recently with mdayonliner).
Likewise, a manager cannot take themselves out of responsibility by claiming all research has to be done by participants, they should do their own due diligence as well,
as they put their reputation on the line with the positions they take on.
If all three groups (mangers, participants, investors) of people do sufficient and independent research, scams can be found and stopped way earlier than right now,
because the more people check a project, the more likely bad apples like these get found both quickly and reliably.
I totally go with you after the conversation I had with you however I will say the managers part is very important because he dealt with the project team first hand. A manager should need to develop a sense of detecting good and bad (trying to scam) project.Likewise, a manager cannot take themselves out of responsibility by claiming all research has to be done by participants, they should do their own due diligence as well,
as they put their reputation on the line with the positions they take on.
If all three groups (mangers, participants, investors) of people do sufficient and independent research, scams can be found and stopped way earlier than right now,
because the more people check a project, the more likely bad apples like these get found both quickly and reliably.
As a participant my experience is...
It's really hard to find a good project. On top of it, a percipient has 100s of projects if not 1000s to chose one. Now, when the number is large of course the person feel overwhelmed, and how much research (especially extensive research) s/he can do? Also you feel uncomfortable in most of them (projects) when you see newbies/members with no good record in the forum posting sig campaign topics.
So to me, the filtering criteria is... Go with a manager who has good reputation, who already proved him/her in the community etc. Of-course don't forget to do your own part (a little research) once you get accepted.
Now come to as an investor: When I am paying money out of my pocket (even if it's a penny), I will definitely make sure that I am not going to lose it. Although in reality most of the time it works the opposite LOL. Scammers are making money out of people.
June 21, 2018, 08:17:27 AM
Nobody is promoting scams, as you can very well see, he closed the campaign.
Indeed, nobody is promoting any scam because the bounty threads for all scams mentioned in OP are closed.Like the thread for xeonframe, which is lock...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3963215.msg40587785;topicseen#msg40587785
wait, it's not locked? That would mean, people are currently promoting a...I don't wanna say it.
Top job designing those signatures, btw.
June 21, 2018, 05:57:33 AM
One question though, are you in any way part of the "Wapinter Bounty Portal" team (you know, the guys with the banned account)?
Since you ask about a shared bounty management account here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/question-for-bitcointalk-staff-3606878
And the very same day, this thread is posted by a member of the WBP team: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/common-shared-account-for-bounty-management-allowed-3603094
The wording is so similar, it's almost...the same.
Is that why you defend Wapinter that much, because you are directly involved here, because you are a member of their team?
You do not have to answer if it's making you feel uncomfortable.
I don't feel uncomfortable at all, Yes I am part of his team, I am not ashamed of my friends, but I also worked for other campaign managers and I was myself marketing manager for a successful ICO which I really don't need to point it out here in this thread, who knows me can confirm that what I say is true.
The wording .... LMFAO PLEASE but I insist, IF you are suggesting that my account is shared or anyone EVER used my account to post, I hereby invite forum admins to check my IPs and if it was used by anyone else I will gladly accept to be banned. IF not, you should add yourself negative trust and ask all your noobcakes army that post for you to give you negative trust for talking crap and putting dirt on someone's reputation.
That said, I am clean, always will be, no reason not to be. I am more of a reader on this forum than a writer.
If there is someone that has something personal with anyone, then that's you my friend. At least thats what I see from your posts towards Wapinter's reputation.
Jump to: