Topic: You think I am a scammer? mdayonliner's reputation (Read 2457 times)

People most of the time are very judgmental, i know you just want to let everyone know, and it's up to use to believe it anyway... But it would be nice to see other people that deals with you will testify that you're not a scammer just what other thinks of you. 

Thanks that you realized. But it's too late. I am not your hater, I just want to repeat TP reply. You always try to argue and convince second party. You had not tried to convince yourself. I can't remember who quoted that, but it's true, However welcome back. Hope you will correction yourself, not just this account. Change should be on person behaviour, it could be this account or others account   Best of luck ...

Thanks The Pharmacist. I never thought to have an alt, never wanted to make big money (which compromise basic human morals) using the forum, never wanted to break any rule(consciously). I gave my best to respect the rules, to respect the community, to keep things in order to help the community. I fell for Bitcoin long ago. Then when I found the community, I felt the urge to do something for the community to help the concept of decentralized currency economy. I wanted to have a good impression of my image, I wanted to create a good brand for my name. I guess it's a very common motivation.

This is for the readers:
I promoted some business in the past (before joining the forum like I said all the time and that's truth) which are not acceptable for some groups (here in this forum, they have different opinions and views) but those who know the industry, know (knew me while I was involved) me, know the business model, know how to sell online products (like anything), know how to learn skills - they always expressed their gratitude, we respected each others, many of them still ask for guidelines from me even though they know I left the industry. I was involved with advertising (precisely online marketing) industry. I promoted several affiliate products (like Ledger products, different hosting services, eBooks, digital educational materials, physical products along with all those online businesses which marked as ponzi business here for some groups) and that requires skills. Try to sell a pen online (not just list it on ebay or AliExpress, think how ebay got their name, think how AliExpress got their name - create an eCommerce brand)  and see for yourself what it takes. These days production is easy but creating marketplace, finding customers to sell your products is the hardest part.

I realize, offering the escrow of 20BTC was very ambitious and that was a mistake I made.

Anyway, I do not have any regret for what I did in the past, I always knew/know my intentions which were/are not to harm anyone and that matters for me. If you can not align with me then it's not my problem, perhaps it's not your problem too. It's the different life experience, different social status, different motivations between you and me. I am proud of what I achieved, I am proud of myself.

Lately, I have decided to change my mind. If I quit then no one will ever know who was mdayonliner, who was me. Perhaps people will conclude me as a ponzi promoter or someone who wanted to scam big money (perhaps this 20BTC escrow deal) and when failed, he left. I don't want to put this bad label next to me. From now on, I will continue with mdayonliner and will keep doing that I was doing all those days. I missed my days on bitcointalk.

Yeah, I already removed the neg I had on him after some consideration of the possibilities of what could have happened.  I know a lot of folks disagree with me on this, but I never thought mdayonliner had any scammy intentions though I admit I cannot know what his intentions are/were. 

I'm somewhat aware of the Ponzi accusations against him, and I've already expressed my opinion about that and about Ponzis as they're conducted as a form of gambling on bitcointalk.  Mdayonliner has always struck me as an individual who's trying to make a lot of money very quickly and tried to establish a reputation for himself here waay too quickly.  The escrow offer was ill-advised, and he paid for that with a neg from hilariousandco.

Whatever the case may be, I don't see enough evidence that he used alt accounts to abuse a bounty.  I thought I did, but now I'm not comfortable with that "evidence" or with leaving him a neg.  If any concrete proof comes along, I will definitely consider it and act accordingly.

phantiennghia - post is incomplete an just looks weird. It would not benefit Mdayonliner in a bounty.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/phantiennghia-1999151

quangtrung1991
Typical account farmer / bounty hunter linked to several accounts.
I haven't looked at this one closely yet.
There social media accounts are blocked / banned / suspended.
https://twitter.com/SDCulinaryInfo?lang=vi



nguyenthanhhieu
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/nguyenthanhhieu-2145313
Follows Creative designs with their twitter.
https://twitter.com/HieuNt2995/following


So it is possible that they were following Mdayonliner and used his post before he did.

I'm on the fence about that one. There are not enough posts on nguyenthanhhieu profile to compare posting style.

nguyenthanhhieu looks like part of an account farm. Look at the time between posts.


Currently there is not a lot of evidence to support it other than that link.

I'd be tempted to give him the benefit of doubt since he did expose a lot of account farmers through his activities on here. It is quite possible that it is either a template copy or deliberate attempt to discredit him.
His reaction to the accusation makes me think that they are not his alts.

If this can help the conversation.

About multi accounts with newbies with few posts:
I've found in the past some newbies posting with random data and accounts with also fake eth address only to increase the post count.
(So in my experience is not a solid proof and someone else can copypaste with bad intention, Image someone gets redtrust and makes a newbie account with the giver of feedback data and report it as alt after few months)

About spreadsheet: Anyone can put fake data, I've found mine also few times, one I've also found Lauda or Mitchell profile, here the report as example https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1snYAM149wlNDyh0_lkR1I3ZQdHkI9Rme-P0IFG9EvBs/edit?usp=sharing from this bounty: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1z9fTA-P8zynx-I3GEzGaY1IVTtDPYzaL8JkCskPC764/edit#gid=1610161553

About Credits managering: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/cheus-credits-manager-4815408

I'm not saying he is innocent or guilty, but I don't think posts from a random 4 posts newbie is a solid proof of alt abusing.

I am not sure, these posts are very close and it doesn't make any sense to copy someone else's post while they could simple copy their own post and redact it (posts are 6 minutes apart), especially it doesn't make sense to use twitter account for facebook campaign:



Yet again, mday didn't use words "facebook account" as account quangtrung1991 in picture above, he used "link to facebook". They copied only his link?  

As for account nguyenthanhhieu and their post https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.39695720 only way they could have done this is to go to mday's twitter and copy/paste link. However, he mentioned something about:

So he either made mistake duo his sickness, someone used his twitter or someone tried to frame him.

I was thinking, only posts these accounts posted are bounty reports so why would they copy anyone's post? They are doing this on daily base, I am pretty sure they have their own drafts. Someone made mistake? I am not sure, I would say that it is possible that nguyenthanhhieu is his alt account, as this is probably first case I have seen that someone has used twitter report of random person before they even posted it.

I am not sure either they are alt of Mdayonliner or not but according to My post/proof they are same person.

Mdayonliner, I was refering to xtraelv's post, #41 where it shows you posted the same likes & shares links as nguyenthanhhieu did the day prior.  I don't know if you explained that or if I missed the explanation or what. 

In any case, after reflecting on this I suspect this is an error you made when copying the report format from another post, which I've seen many bounty hunters do.  That was the basis for the feedback I left you.

I'd like to hear the opinions about this from xtraelv and any of the other members I generally trust who've posted in this thread.  Just about the possible bounty abuse and the credibility of the evidence presented here.

I'd personally rather err on the side of caution than think most people are angels who won't scam you given the chance, but scammers will be disproportional on here compared to real life because this is a board about magical internet money that you can't get back once you send it so it's the perfect money for scammers and that's why they flock here. Once they've scammed you that's it in 99% of cases. Money gone and you'll never see it again. If you can build up a bit of trust and rep and go for the long con then it's much easier to run off with a big amount at some point. I still wouldn't trust someone who comes up to me on the street and asks to borrow money though or someone I've known for year or so offers to escrow a large cash deal for me. Adding the layer of anonymity with the internet just makes things easier to go sketchy without repercussions.


Big Dicks is a troll; just ignore him. $100k is a lot of money to anyone unless you're a billionaire. $100k is a worth a lot more if you're not from the West too.

$100K may not be much to you but I want you to understand that the issues on here is not about the forum been filled millionaires or poor people. Even since I'm on this forum doing escrow of any huge fund on this forum require two or three trusted parties signatures and trying to operate the escrow of huge fund alone will definitely raise a red flag which is what is happening now.

A good person can turn bad .

Can you address this:

I don't think I understood your question correctly. nguyenthanhhieu is not me so saying "you (me, mdayonliner which I understand I guess) posted the same Twitter link as nguyenthanhhieu did AFTER he'd (who?) already posted it? Had he(who?) done this previously?" is making me confuse. Can you rephrase it please?

However I guess I figured the confusion: If I am not wrong then we are talking about this two posts...
https://archive.fo/6wSFj#selection-3065.0-3065.84 post #1011
https://archive.fo/rQ5eg#selection-5981.0-5981.84 post #2199

And the twitter feed is:  https://twitter.com/cDesignsUK/status/1003628228907446278

It seems I (mdayonliner) made the last post (#2199). According to the twitter date-time I made this tweet/retweet at 6:23 AM - 4 Jun 2018 nguyenthanhhieu posted it on June 09, 2018, 05:11:05 AM


This is the post which I edited/updated with the draft reports (every time I made a twitter posts and/or facebook posts for the weeks. The original date of the post was May 30, 2018, last edited September 02, 2018). Once I completed the task for a week I copied the report part from the post and submitted the report for the week. Check all the report links posted from for all the weeks (week#1, #2, etc).

What I assume is: for week #2 (post#2199) I was staking my Twitter and Fecebook posts on the draft post#3. Before I completed my task for the whole week nguyenthanhhieu copied from my draft post and made post#1011 on June 09, 2018 which was obviously before my reporting post for that 2nd week June 10, 2018. Now, I see I edited the post on June 17, 2018. I can not recall why I did that but most probably I edited any spelling mistake on the bottom part of the note I left for the bounty manager.

---

Not exactly it's "any more" (How it's any more where there were no link at all. Anyone can post my twitter feed from their bitcoinTalk account and in this case they already did for whatever the reason)

---

That's correct.

It was a hypothetical scenario which obviously was not meant to you but seems like it happened/happening to me.

---

---

If I start listing the lies then I am sure there will be a long list however I am not sure if I am willing to do that but if that is very necessary then I will do that.

How would I or anyone know? Everyone (including me) have no doubt about the xtraelv now that s/he are capable of earning merits and his/her judgement about sending merits are good enough but that time, people had no idea that the old xtraelv were capable of receiving merits and had a good judgement of sending merits specially after looking at the screenshots above.

---

---

Questionable because you never wanted to answer the questions I left on the investigation topic.

By waking up I meant about the red trust you left for me. You could left one shortly after hilary tagged me or may be after the PM respond I left for you. What took you too long to tag me?

I had no idea that conversation means only the PMs (which is one or two I guess). Would you ignore the public conversations? https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scam-alert-lost-008-btc-please-stay-safe-4773983

For what it's worth, I understand your position on this and respect it--and I know why you left that neg for mdayonliner.

In real life, I generally tend to look for the best side of people, though I'm not stupid enough to take everything people say and do at face value.  And yes, I've been fooled many times before and expect I'll be fooled again.  I try to take a much more skeptical approach on bitcointalk, where it seems like the proportion of scammers here is orders of magnitude greater than it is IRL. 


I suspect it's true for most people, unfortunately.  We've all seen seemingly good members go bad on bitcointalk when the potential to run away with someone's funds presents itself, and I'm pretty sure we've also seen this happen in business, politics, and a lot of other situations that have nothing to do with this forum. 

As for me, I'm going to try to be more vigilant, diligent, and fair when evaluating whether someone deserves a neg--and I'll do my best to not be so naive about members and the image they try to present to the forum.  I'm not comfortable when mistakes come back to bite me in the ass because I relied on someone else's blockchain detective work and handed out undeserved negs because of that.

Sometimes people's goal is just to make money in any which way they can. I think his ponzi past it's relevant because there's usually a certain type of people who get involved with them - get rich schemers who don't really care how or why they get their money as long as it enriches them. Of course, many of them probably know what they're getting into and accept the risks, but if you're ok with making money from ponzis where you know someone is going to end up out of pocket it's not a big step to taking money that doesn't belong to you when you get the chance, especially when it's a huge amount and running off with it would likely have no repercussions legally. As with mdayonliner we will never know whether he would have or not, but the risk for me is too big to ignore unluckily for him. I never really trust anyone who offers to hold onto other's money when they're not qualified to and more often than not it does go sour when they do and that's why this is such a big issue that makes me intrinsically distrust people when they do it.

Trust issue comes when to judge that is a scammer or not and this lead to the proper system to identify the trusted people. But since here monetary facts involved, you deserve to get a red mark on your trust level. This forum is a huge platform now and there are so many scams around us. So it is one of the major responsibilities for the modos to have the right mark (Green or Red) beside the profile so that people can easily track whom to trust and from whom to stay away. Thanks seniors for flagging properly.

I've said it before, I think mdayonliner was just being too ambitious both in his efforts to make money and build a reputation for himself on bitcointalk--the latter is always why I thought he offered to escrow that huge amount.  But I also agree that once an amount like $100k is in someone's hands, there's got to be some temptation to just take it and run.  I never thought his escrow offer was a scam attempt, but it was ill-advised at best.

As far as the ponzi stuff goes, I have very mixed feelings on it, but only as far as when it happens on bitcointalk.  For one thing, ponzis have their own section here, so you know they're rampant and Theymos doesn't give a shit about them, and another reason is that I think most people who participate in these "investor-based games" basically know what they're getting into and that just like other forms of gambling, there's only a small chance of winning.  I've always thought that whole section should be nuked, but it must benefit the forum or the bitcoin community....or someone.

This is also why I tended to ignore mdayonliner's ponzi history and in general why I don't tag ponzi promoters--but I respect those members who do take a stand against them.

DT members definitely get a lot of shit for things they do or don't do, and as you know I've made some mistakes in tagging members based on bad evidence or bad judgement, and that doesn't give me a good feeling.

Every man has his price, as the old saying goes. Whether or not that's true, well that's a whole other discussion.

Sometimes people just want to be trusted so they can make more money as quickly as possible here (nothing inherently wrong with that),  and sometimes people want to be trusted just so they can abuse that trust at some point and run off with as much money as possible. I'm really on the fence about mdayonliner. He could just be one of those naive guys who jumps into the deep end head first and wants to just make a bit of cash as fast as he can and however he can, or he could be one of those guys who would have just run off as soon as they earned enough trust to be trusted with a large amount of money. You could also start out with the greatest of intentions, but once someone entrusts you with a lot of cash it can make even a good man turn bad and we've seen a few previously very trusted people abuse their 'trusted' position here in the past once they got their hands on an amount they liked. Given mdayonliner ponzi past and a few other things it makes me trust him a lot less, but again, he could just be naively wanting to earn as much as he can, but it's the people who who will often make money whichever desperate way they can that you often have to be most weary of.


Sometimes it's not done to frame someone per se, but it's just bots or bounty spammers trying to abuse other user's publicly posted details. Most of these ICO crap campaigns are lax with their checking and many probably don't even do any sort of verification so it's easy for someone else to use some other users detail and post it as their own. Seen it happen numerous times and I've even seen someone using my name on spreadsheets to try claim bounties with their own address etc.

From what I have seen it is more of a curse than a benefit to be on the DT list.