Slot #: 24
BTC Address: bc1qpzwvre2ynerqxc6nk6ur8zspvdx54qrzwyy7f7

---

List of picked number!

USERNAME	SLOT	RANK	REG DATE	POST
......................................	......	....................	................................	.........
bitbollo	01	Legendary	August 07, 2014	check
Leahized	02	Full Member	September 20, 2023	check
cocadalcan	03	Full Member	February 19, 2024	check
Tmoonz	04	Hero Member	December 20, 2023	check
inspace	05	Legendary	November 19, 2018	check
dkbit98	06	Legendary	December 10, 2017	check
Yorubek	07	Full Member	December 20, 2023	check
sokani	08	Hero Member	December 05, 2022	check
katanic97	09	Hero Member	February 20, 2018	check
ChocolateBitcoinK	11	Full Member	June 11, 2024	check
Derekfunds	12	Sr. Member	April 08, 2024	check
Odohu	13	Hero Member	March 05, 2023	check
Cassius55	15	Member	March 19, 2026	check
Mr. Magkaisa	16	Sr. Member	April 13, 2022	check
Decimetre	16	Member	February 01, 2026	check
champions	17	Member	December 23, 2023	check
Real-Duke	18	Legendary	December 22, 2014	check
Cityhunter34	20	Sr. Member	September 07, 2023	check
fillippone	21	Legendary	February 18, 2018	check
TryNinja	22	Legendary	September 27, 2015	check
GazetaBitcoin	23	Legendary	November 06, 2017	check
Rhow	25	Full Member	January 31, 2025	check
Danydee	26	Legendary	July 21, 2013	check
fredericktaylor	27	Sr. Member	June 05, 2023	check
klarki	28	Legendary	December 30, 2014	check
CONVOAI	29	Member	November 25, 2025	check
FinneysTrueVision	30	Legendary	October 13, 2018	check
Forsyth Jones	31	Legendary	January 11, 2017	check
Italian Panic	32	Hero Member	April 14, 2023	check
mikel_012	32	Hero Member	August 11, 2020	check
Pandu Geddon	33	Hero Member	November 30, 2021	check
examplens	34	Legendary	April 13, 2014	check
notblox1	35	Legendary	April 08, 2018	check
DYING_S0UL	36	Legendary	October 27, 2022	check
ovcijisir	37	Legendary	October 30, 2017	check
Ricardo11	38	Sr. Member	April 30, 2023	check
haloxon	38	Sr. Member	-	check
GIF-JOBS	39	Sr. Member	October 17, 2023	check
Pmalek	40	Legendary	-	check
hugeblack	41	Legendary	July 08, 2017	check
Hypnotizer	42	Full Member	September 01, 2025	check
xandry	44	Legendary	-	check
alegotardo	45	Legendary	-	check
Kuchuku	46	-	-	check
Rikafip	46	Legendary	August 03, 2019	check
Koal-84	48	Legendary	April 20, 2017	check
Bigjoe33	48	Sr. Member	August 10, 2024	check
Mehmet69	49	Full Member	-	check
sabotag3x	50	Legendary	May 24, 2016	check

Available Slots (6): 10, 14, 19, 24, 43, 47

Note:
⚠ Slot 16 has been claimed by Mr. Magkaisa and Decimetre; the first picker is Mr. Magkaisa.
⚠ Slot 32 has been claimed by Italian Panic and mikel_012; the first picker is Italian Panic.
⚠ Slot 38 has been claimed by Ricardo11 and haloxon; the first picker is Ricardo11.
⚠ Slot 46 has been claimed by Kuchuku and Rikafip; the first picker is Kuchuku.
⚠ Slot 48 has been claimed by Koal-84 and Bigjoe33; the first picker is Koal-84.

---

Note on the duplicates/first picks: this is just scraped data, not a final decision. The manager can still move or reassign the slots based on their rules. This is just for reference. Also, since it's an automated scrape, sometimes error or bug can happen, just double check it.


You can use https://t.me/btalkgamesbot miniapp before picking slot number to prevent duplicate.

Is this an appropriate use of red trust?



Red trust link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5585350.msg66821527#msg66821527
Neutral trust link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5585350.msg66821644#msg66821644

For reference sake the doxx was indeed nuked by me, there was also this follow up topic regarding it: https://www.altcoinstalks.com/index.php?topic=342763.0 (created by reputable member philipma1957 who would be able to confirm it's existence)

Some other members from here who posted in it can also confirm it existed, if there is any doubt. Hate to tag DT member @jokers10 but he can also confirm it existed as another reviewing mod there, should that be necessary.

Pinging current DT members who are sponsoring this tag:
@HostFat, @babo, @Cyrus, @ibminer, @jeremypwr, @stompix, @JayJuanGee, @examplens, @LFC_Bitcoin, @LoyceV, @TryNinja, @Lafu, @icopress, @Lakai01, @YOSHIE, @bullrun2024bro, @Charles-Tim.

Are you all OK with retaliatory tagging against moderators of another forum who nuke doxxing ? If so, I must be in the wrong place.

Regards,
-dragon

Recap total participants i scraped this thread using https://t.me/btalkgamesbot let me know if you find wrong data here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5584491.0

---

USERNAME	SLOT	RANK	REG DATE	POST
......................................	......	....................	................................	.........
dkbit98	01	Legendary	December 10, 2017	check
Odohu	01	Hero Member	March 05, 2023	check
fredericktaylor	02	Sr. Member	June 05, 2023	check
CONVOAI	03	Member	November 25, 2025	check
Awaklara	04	Hero Member	January 04, 2019	check
inspace	05	Legendary	November 19, 2018	check
Tmoonz	06	Hero Member	December 20, 2023	check
katanic97	09	Hero Member	February 20, 2018	check
bitmover	10	Legendary	December 31, 2017	check
mikel_012	13	Hero Member	August 11, 2020	check
sokani	14	Hero Member	December 05, 2022	check
Cassius55	15	Member	March 19, 2026	check
Mr. Magkaisa	16	Sr. Member	April 13, 2022	check
FinneysTrueVision	16	Legendary	October 13, 2018	check
eaLiTy	17	Hero Member	March 22, 2016	check
hugeblack	18	Legendary	July 08, 2017	check
ChocolateBitcoinK	19	Full Member	June 11, 2024	check
fillippone	21	Legendary	February 18, 2018	check
TryNinja	22	Legendary	September 27, 2015	check
GazetaBitcoin	23	Legendary	November 06, 2017	check
DYING_S0UL	24	Legendary	October 27, 2022	check
Pandorak	24	Sr. Member	January 24, 2023	check
Yorubek	25	Full Member	December 20, 2023	check
Mehmet69	26	Full Member	April 09, 2023	check
Real-Duke	27	Legendary	December 22, 2014	check
examplens	28	Legendary	April 13, 2014	check
Itz-prisigold	29	Sr. Member	October 02, 2025	check
Ricardo11	31	Sr. Member	April 30, 2023	check
Italian Panic	32	Hero Member	April 14, 2023	check
Bigjoe33	33	Sr. Member	August 10, 2024	check
Hypnotizer	34	Full Member	September 01, 2025	check
ovcijisir	34	Legendary	October 30, 2017	check
notblox1	35	Legendary	April 08, 2018	check
RedFlix	36	Member	March 21, 2025	check
Kuchuku	36	-	December 29, 2025	check
Pmalek	37	Legendary	May 05, 2013	check
tvplus006	38	Legendary	November 14, 2017	check
dwyane36	39	Legendary	November 23, 2015	check
Knight Hider	40	Full Member	October 17, 2021	check
LUZUMYY	40	Newbie	May 10, 2026	check
Leahized	41	Full Member	September 20, 2023	check
klarki	42	Legendary	December 30, 2014	check
GIF-JOBS	43	Sr. Member	October 17, 2023	check
Pandu Geddon	44	Hero Member	November 30, 2021	check
Rikafip	46	Legendary	August 03, 2019	check
champions	47	Member	December 23, 2023	check
Barcode_	47	Hero Member	February 21, 2016	check
Koal-84	48	Legendary	April 20, 2017	check
Cityhunter34	49	Sr. Member	September 07, 2023	check
bitbollo	50	Legendary	August 07, 2014	check

Available Slots (7): 07, 08, 11, 12, 20, 30, 45

Note:
⚠ Slot 01 has been claimed by dkbit98 and Odohu; the first picker is dkbit98.
⚠ Slot 16 has been claimed by Mr. Magkaisa and FinneysTrueVision; the first picker is Mr. Magkaisa.
⚠ Slot 24 has been claimed by DYING_S0UL and Pandorak; the first picker is DYING_S0UL.
⚠ Slot 34 has been claimed by Hypnotizer and ovcijisir; the first picker is Hypnotizer.
⚠ Slot 36 has been claimed by RedFlix and Kuchuku; the first picker is RedFlix.
⚠ Slot 40 has been claimed by Knight Hider and LUZUMYY; the first picker is Knight Hider.
⚠ Slot 47 has been claimed by champions and Barcode_; the first picker is champions.

---

Note on the duplicates/first picks: this is just scraped data, not a final decision. The manager can still move or reassign the slots based on their rules. This is just for reference. Also, since it's an automated scrape, sometimes error or bug can happen, just double check it.

---

The point is that the deal was for a system that runs ads and gets customers. that never happened. so the point isn’t whether the websites were created or whether ad attempts were made. Even if that’s all true, the agreed result still never happened.

The OP has already stated that it did not generate any customers, nor did it provide any returns or value, based on what was paid, which was $10,545.

Your previous experience does not negate the failure of this specific project.

I also agree with @examplens. If the service was illegal or highly restricted, then it should have been told upfront from the beginning that results were not guaranteed or that the campaign could fail entirely. This was not clearly communicated, and you kept taking payments from the OP regardless.

you’ve admitted the repayment, so the issue is still not resolved.

However, this isn’t about tech details anymore, what matters now is repayment or a real plan to do it.

Ads did run with cloaking implemented but budget didn't allow sufficient rotation of accounts, that's how many websites still do it, they keep changing ads account. These were things I've ran in the past hence why took on the project. I've always delivered on my work. So since that we moved to 1337 & trafficjunky where issue was they didn't run it as often & at the provided timezones because the same issue, budget wasn't enough. Give made screenshots when it ran. Getting all those vcc to to fund anonymous ads account and all weren't cheap. User already knew it was an illegal endeavor to begin with and really did try my best to get it to work. I've since also offered my help to help restart any other project that the user needs. Anyway, once I'm out from my treatment I'll have the repayment restarted. Been here for so many years and have served so many reputable member here so I'm not going to ruin it for myself and also others.

I think ot best of they should learn from the other's experience, or maybe they are not seeing it the way they want you to put it in a better direction for them...

Just my thoughts...

I wanted to stop following the news related to Cryptopia because there was never any real good news. Whether it was about Cryptopia or Grant Thornton or the never ending hearings taking place in the New Zealand courts, the victims seemed to have never been given priority. I suppose I check this thread because I still hope that all of the victims might one day receive some portion of their stolen assets.

Well, this adds a new dimension to how desperate for funds some of the Cryptopia victims are.

I also got a kind of confused. I thought MotoLM was from the KycNotList team or a member of LittleMouse team until I read the neutral tag. Newcomers actually do not pay apt attention to feedbacks. I don't know if it's wise for LM to write theymos and change his alt username to "LittleMouseAlt". This will be less confusing to new members and will also strengthen his branding. It could also prevent scam, I learnt that people create telegram usernames with campaign managers name.

In a situation like this, is there a remedy?
It should be, no prove, no compensation.

That's because the refund wallet should be Bitcoin address since you're sending Bitcoin!

Question to community please suggest us a fair amount for Quality reviews?

That still doesn't prevent collusion between the exchange and yourself, but it adds the possibility of either 2 out of the 3 parties colluding, so I'm not sure if this will be better.

With $10k on the line, I don't mind spending a couple of hours to be safe.

Thanks for the advices but FYI, none of the communication with the involved party was from this account, neither will it be.

If the community accept a generic review by a new acccount without an evidence of service review, it will take a fake project less than $500 to get shillers who will register throw away accounts and make countless number of worthless reviews.

This is why the community has to look beyond reviews and focus on the behavioral pattern of project owners.

I understand you and to add to your statement, I think it is fairly obligatory for anyone promoting a project throw their signature to test/use the service they promote.

The victim might not be a regular forum user. They might just stumble on their ann and got carried away by the reviews.

They do pay. But you have to multiply their stated timeframe. Of course, the bitcoin price can significantly go downard during the meantime. but this is the risks holders are willing to pay.

@mikel_012
Fair point on Base — the math works exactly like you said. Doing BTC → USDC on ETH first and then bridging to Base does eat the gains, especially on smaller amounts. Direct native USDC on Base would solve that.
Polymarket alone is a real use case driving Base adoption — and you're right that the whole prediction market / consumer crypto wave is happening on L2s now, not on mainnet. We hear you. Base and Polygon are on the radar after we close out the main roadmap items.
And your advice about starting small — couldn't agree more. We say the same thing in our own support. Test with a small amount first, verify the flow, build confidence, then go bigger. Anyone who skips that step on any service is asking for trouble.
@MarryWithBTC @examplens
Honestly — fair criticism, and we appreciate it. We are not going to pretend every positive review on this thread comes from a Hero Member with 5 years of history. New accounts dropping generic praise happens on every ANN thread, and yes — the Tomboi case (and others before it) showed exactly how dangerous it gets when a community starts trusting volume of feedback over quality of feedback.
We would much rather have ten critical posts with screenshots and Order IDs than fifty "great service" comments from accounts that registered yesterday. Reviews with actual transaction data are the only kind that mean anything.
For anyone reading this thread later — examplens and MarryWithBTC are right. Don't take any single comment at face value. Look at the user's history, ask for proof, test the service yourself with small amounts before trusting it with anything serious. That's how this forum is supposed to work, and we have zero problem with that bar being applied to us.

Hi, I'm pluja, the admin of KYCnot.me. I have just updated Tomboi's entry, marked it as SCAM, and added a link to this thread.


Thanks for reporting it. I try to handle these as quickly as possible, but there is a lot of work on KYCnot.me, and Tomboi was still a Community Contributed service, not an approved or verified one. With over 500 services listed, I usually prioritize the services shown on the main page, since those are the ones most users are likely to click on and use.

That said, I understand the concern. Scam warnings should be visible as soon as possible. Pending comments are still visible with the "pending" toggle, but I agree this is not ideal for urgent warnings. I will look into how to make serious reports more visible before full review.


Please share the source and the exact review or comment you are referring to. I review order IDs manually, so if a fake or non-existent order ID was accepted, I need to investigate it. If the report is correct, I will remove the review and correct the mistake.

KYCnot.me is a resource, not a source of truth. I do my best to keep it reliable, but it is an independent project maintained mostly by me, and mistakes can happen. The code is open source, and I am open to suggestions, issues, pull requests, or any other help that can improve the site and make it more reliable.


You're right. The project depends too much on me right now, and I need more help with moderation, service updates, scam reports, and review verification.

I cannot monitor every service, comment, report, and forum thread 24/7 by myself. I put a lot of time into KYCnot.me because I believe it is useful, but it needs a better process and more contributors.

Thanks to everyone who reported this. I will work on improving the process so serious reports can be reviewed and surfaced faster next time.

The important thing is to use low amounts so you do not risk a lot of money. After you receive your money you can send more until you swap everything

I heard about the Tomboi case and I could not believe someone sent $100k at once to a service that new

Even if you like DEX.fo, it is better to not send everything you have if you can not lose it. Not because they are a scam but because you never know what will happen

Don't know whether it's a lack of creativity or not, but there is another exchange with a similar name, it doesn't look good at all. He shared his personal opinion, everything is fine but it would have been better if the name had been different. Before doing anything, one should know well but he explained that he didn't know about this so there is nothing he can do now.

Anyway, their service seems fairly good and they are also paying good attention to customer support. Although the similarity in names will not cause any problems, if they can perform well in customer service, they will gradually gain popularity as well.

Update:
DT 1
     1. 35: theymos (Trust: +29 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (58) 14510 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
     2. 11425: gmaxwell (Trust: +13 / =0 / -1) (DT1! (16) 9807 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
     3. 33156: vapourminer (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (6) 5216 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
     4. 51173: mprep (Trust: +6 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (20) 1761 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
     5. 55384: Foxpup (Trust: +6 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (15) 2788 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
     6. 64507: philipma1957 (Trust: +31 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (19) 10971 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
     7. 65636: babo (Trust: +15 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (4) 4659 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
     8. 78147: Cyrus (Trust: +22 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (20) 2800 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
     9. 84521: Welsh (Trust: +4 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (24) 3469 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    10. 84866: ibminer (Trust: +15 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (8) 2724 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    11. 85033: d5000 (Trust:  neutral) (DT1! (3) 9716 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    12. 97582: joker_josue (Trust: +8 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (8) 6563 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    13. 112493: Pmalek (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (2) 8769 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    14. 123824: albon (Trust: +7 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (10) 2043 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    15. 131333: wwzsocki (Trust: +16 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (0) 1519 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    16. 137185: jeremypwr (Trust: +57 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (17) 6233 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    17. 140582: gbianchi (Trust: +4 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (4) 2494 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    18. 140584: EFS (Trust: +10 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (7) 2147 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    19. 158444: hybridsole (Trust: +19 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (5) 503 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    20. 164749: stompix (Trust:  neutral) (DT1! (10) 6561 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    21. 164822: hilariousandco (Trust: +28 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (30) 1896 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    22. 189967: buckrogers (Trust: +31 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (4) 195 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    23. 204821: Buchi-88 (Trust: +7 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (6) 2343 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    24. 206143: Lesbian Cow (Trust: +44 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (9) 758 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    25. 216582: willi9974 (Trust: +50 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (9) 2974 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    26. 252510: JayJuanGee (Trust: +7 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (21) 13509 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    27. 257071: NeuroticFish (Trust: +4 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (8) 6209 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    28. 290195: achow101 (Trust: +6 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (10) 6737 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    29. 300014: DaveF (Trust: +33 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (20) 6818 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    30. 314792: examplens (Trust: +8 / =5 / -0) (DT1! (25) 3673 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    31. 317618: nutildah (Trust: +21 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (32) 9978 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    32. 350580: irfan_pak10 (Trust: +16 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (2) 735 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    33. 355846: yahoo62278 (Trust: +36 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (24) 4367 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    34. 364070: bitbollo (Trust: +18 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (7) 3739 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    35. 379147: pooya87 (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (5) 11284 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    36. 379487: LFC_Bitcoin (Trust: +33 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (22) 11881 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    37. 395806: o_solo_miner (Trust: +8 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (4) 532 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    38. 405482: Real-Duke (Trust: +3 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 2751 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    39. 407174: klarki (Trust: +6 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (3) 4539 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    40. 459836: LoyceV (Trust: +32 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (61) 20926 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    41. 487418: The Sceptical Chymist (Trust: +32 / =3 / -0) (DT1! (28) 6332 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    42. 557798: TryNinja (Trust: +12 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (9) 9892 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    43. 754818: holydarkness (Trust: +7 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (14) 1385 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    44. 805820: Lafu (Trust: +18 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (15) 4058 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    45. 830967: tweetious (Trust: +32 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (3) 451 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    46. 839568: AakZaki (Trust: +8 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (5) 1876 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    47. 889300: giammangiato (Trust: +2 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (4) 1492 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    48. 901859: buwaytress (Trust: +30 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (10) 3775 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    49. 914465: crwth (Trust: +3 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (0) 1343 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    50. 932931: Ale88 (Trust: +4 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (4) 3504 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    51. 995810: hosemary (Trust: +2 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (8) 6751 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    52. 1000199: krogothmanhattan (Trust: +93 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (17) 4193 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    53. 1016855: JollyGood (Trust: +21 / =3 / -0) (DT1! (17) 1957 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    54. 1045971: igebotz (Trust: +15 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (11) 2289 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    55. 1059082: hugeblack (Trust: +7 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (11) 4561 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    56. 1067333: El duderino_ (Trust: +26 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (12) 15534 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    57. 1097370: KTChampions (Trust: +6 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (6) 2274 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    58. 1099980: Trofo (Trust: +31 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (13) 3469 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    59. 1137579: icopress (Trust: +87 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (38) 12589 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    60. 1190631: JeromeTash (Trust: +3 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (7) 1442 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    61. 1247226: logfiles (Trust: +6 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (8) 2290 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    62. 1269497: Bitcoin_Arena (Trust: +2 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (4) 2066 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    63. 1285797: GazetaBitcoin (Trust: +13 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (17) 9815 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    64. 1311641: tvplus006 (Trust: +13 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (13) 2593 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    65. 1424178: mole0815 (Trust: +7 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (11) 3522 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    66. 1554927: bitmover (Trust: +7 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (6) 7456 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    67. 1582324: DdmrDdmr (Trust: +10 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (21) 11346 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    68. 1634314: shahzadafzal (Trust: +3 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (2) 3243 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    69. 1724800: Lakai01 (Trust: +3 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (5) 4129 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    70. 1827294: Husna QA (Trust: +2 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (5) 3400 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    71. 1852120: fillippone (Trust: +14 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (23) 20673 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    72. 1862043: cryptofrka (Trust: +17 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (8) 2775 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    73. 1878246: abhiseshakana (Trust: +2 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (1) 2476 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    74. 1980983: The Cryptovator (Trust: +20 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (18) 2584 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    75. 1982152: lovesmayfamilis (Trust: +29 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (30) 5645 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    76. 2003859: DireWolfM14 (Trust: +19 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (20) 5684 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    77. 2015418: notblox1 (Trust: +3 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (1) 1582 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    78. 2344286: Little Mouse (Trust: +48 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (13) 3650 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    79. 2363935: YOSHIE (Trust: +10 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (17) 1897 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    80. 2477002: inspace (Trust: +5 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (3) 1422 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    81. 2497429: jokers10 (Trust: +3 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (7) 4050 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    82. 2519096: Awaklara (Trust: +2 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (6) 837 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    83. 2652924: geophphreigh (Trust: +32 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (5) 1144 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    84. 2654005: zasad@ (Trust: +3 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (7) 5609 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    85. 2658890: Rikafip (Trust: +13 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (28) 7999 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    86. 2709122: Etranger (Trust: +2 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (2) 1871 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    87. 2739424: NotATether (Trust: +7 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (10) 9735 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    88. 2739454: Stalker22 (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (7) 1583 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    89. 2744352: bullrun2024bro (Trust: +4 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (7) 5289 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    90. 2775483: BlackHatCoiner (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (6) 9796 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    91. 2776678: Charles-Tim (Trust: +5 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (4) 6371 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    92. 2796662: Lillominato89 (Trust: +2 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (4) 1250 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    93. 2836461: Free Market Capitalist (Trust: +1 / =1 / -0) (DT1! (6) 3441 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    94. 3373858: n0nce (Trust:  neutral) (DT1! (5) 6057 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    95. 3442614: YodasRedRocket (Trust: +31 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (2) 650 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)

DT 2
     1. 3: satoshi (Trust: +40 / =0 / -0) (8652 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     2. 4: sirius (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (935 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     3. 1268: nanotube (Trust: +2 / =0 / -0) (1 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     4. 2252: laanwj (Trust:  neutral) (50 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     5. 2676: casascius (Trust: +6 / =0 / -1) (193 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     6. 2759: midnightmagic (Trust: +2 / =0 / -0) (27 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
     7. 2786: Pieter Wuille (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (203 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
     8. 3318: Luke-Jr (Trust: +2 / =0 / -0) (201 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
     9. 3380: Vladimir (Trust:  neutral) (1 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    10. 3420: dooglus (Trust: +11 / =0 / -0) (335 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    11. 4171: Raize (Trust:  neutral) (24 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    12. 4528: Matt Corallo (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (15 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    13. 5797: grue (Trust: +2 / =0 / -0) (494 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    14. 6347: Maged (Trust:  neutral) (17 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)
    15. 6447: forrestv (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (143 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    16. 7351: EPiSKiNG (Trust: +5 / =0 / -0) (1 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    17. 10354: JJG (Trust:  neutral) (10 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
    18. 10502: SgtSpike (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (5 Merit earned) (Custom Trust list) (BPIP)

Newly registered user.

Please give me a source so I can check where this was discussed.

It means whoever recommended it in the discord server (if he wasn't part of the scammers) must have seen the service from somewhere. Perhaps in this forum or one of the aggregator website and probably saw a security deposit but possibly didn't pay attention to how much had been deposited. Either way people need to learn how to value their money and always carry our background checks before any transaction is made

I think we would try to reimburse everyone to the same %. So for instance user A and user B would both get 20%. That said, much to the upset of the exchanges we list on OrangeFren.com, we are very quick to delist if there's any issues.

Apologies for slow communication on our end, we're hosting MoneroKon this weekend
You can watch it live here: https://www.youtube.com/@MoneroCommunityWorkgroup/live

Sure, letter of guaranty will be added in the next update. BTC and XMR currently have the highest amount of confirmations required, they will be reduced in the next few days, I agree that those swaps take ages to complete.

As far as the liquidity question and min/max for 1 swap, the API won't allow you making a swap that's above our liquidity and there's frontend protection against that as well - the swap page is always synced with the current liquidity, so you'll see an instant "unavailable" message, if you enter an amount above our reserves and the "swap" button will disappear. In rare cases, where 2 max liquidity swaps are happening at the same time and one completes before the other one, an automatic refund is executed. We had a system where each swap reserved liquidity, so such cases would be impossible, but obviously this would've led to a huge abuse doorway.

Most of the initial funding was done through FF, we don't have a relationship with them - it was the easiest way of getting the assets that we needed, without touching KYC exchanges. The next funding round will have a mix of binance+kucoin coins.

Thanks for the feedback! <3

Kycnotme is an unreliable source. I found a short post by a user named saylor22 on a Russian-language forum, in which he clearly demonstrates how he writes a fake review and lists the ID of a non-existent exchange, yet the review is published as verified. I also found a review of KycNotList there.

I wasn't entirely sure on which specific website the user “byware.netSCAM” lost $10,000, so I contacted him via private message, and he told me that the loss occurred on the “byware” exchange. It turns out that ‘Antikyc_’ also failed to refund the user's deposit specifically due to the “byware” scam. I’m also curious-does this mean “Antikyc_” is pocketing the deposits for itself? Since it’s not paying them out to the victims?

I’d also like to clarify the situation with “Tomboi”-he also had a $500 deposit on your platform. So far, there are two victims, one for $100,000 and one for $7,000.

Antikyc_: Will you make payments to the victims from the deposit? Or, as in the case of “byware,” will you refuse to do so?

We wanted something short for a domain name and we found this to be the best (a word relatable to crypto). That being said, we didn't actually do any "market research" before we started the development, only when we started rolling out for production we found out the amount of such services named "dex" haha.

---

Of course! I'll prepare the list and send it to you:)

Vor ein paar Tagen wurde wieder die neue Default Trust 1 Liste von theymos bekannt gegeben für den Monat Juni !

Hier waren wieder 103 Benutzer dafür berechtigt !

Original Beitrag von theymos : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5117330.msg66787880#msg66787880


Alte Default Trust 1 Liste :

Neue Default Trust 1 Liste :

Aus dem Deutschen Bereich sind wieder dabei : bullrun2024bro , Lakai01 , mole0815 , Real-Duke , o_solo_miner , willi9974 , Buchi-88 , d5000 und meine wenigkeit !
Denke hier kann man nicht mekern 

Hier das genaue Update von LoyceV , Danke dafür !

I agree with you. In this case, I contacted Little Mouse to find out how many victims have reached out to him, but before making any payments, I’ll also ask him how he plans to distribute the funds so we can take that into account as well.

I hope he’ll get back to us so we can distribute everything more effectively, but for the future, we need to think carefully about how to regulate all this, since some have more than two escrow accounts, and the largest deposits are usually held on dark web resources-especially if the exchange is No KYC or provides mixing services-which makes coordination between multiple escrow accounts even more difficult.

I may be mistaken, but it seems this user mentioned that he fell victim to a scam on other websites, which he associates with Tomboi’s activities.
1) He did not contact us regarding being a victim of the Tomboi website in order to be eligible for a payout from the deposit.
2) He stated that the scammer’s deposit on Antikyc.io was $1,000. But on Tomboi, the deposit on Antikyc.io was $500, not $1,000.
3) Based on the user’s nickname and the text, it seems more likely that he fell victim to a scam by the Byware exchange, and in this context, he suspects that Tomboi is connected to those sites.

I could be wrong, so just in case, I sent a private message to this user to clarify the situation.

We understand your loss and sincerely sympathize, but please be more respectful toward the forum members. The discussion here is less about the current situation and more about possible future scenarios and how to properly allocate deposits in such cases. As I understand it, there are currently only two victims: you and the person who lost $7,000. If no other victims come forward, it stands to reason that it wouldn’t be in Tomboi’s interest to scam the project over $7,000, and your claim of a $100,000 exchange is likely legitimate.

You also made a mistake by transferring an amount five times greater than the exchange’s total deposit balance—and if you include the deposit on our service, ten times greater. Our website includes a warning: “We strongly recommend that a single transaction does not exceed the exchanger’s deposit amount.”
The problem is that users who follow these rules end up with practically nothing if everything is distributed on a percentage basis, although the greater blame lies with whoever set an exchange amount that was too high and exceeded the deposit.

And this is no longer specifically about you, but rather about the fact that, in theory, an exchange preparing to scam users could initiate such a transaction itself in order to seize the majority of the deposit. This discussion is more about what rules should be established in the future to distribute the deposit more effectively among the victims.

As I already mentioned in my private message, I will make a payment equal to a percentage of the losses incurred by those affected, and that is exactly what I will do-we value our reputation and keep our word. But in this case, there is a person who lost $7,000 and followed the rules by not exceeding the exchange’s deposit limit when creating the trade, and if calculated as a percentage of his total amount, he will receive only $654, which does not seem entirely fair. Given this situation, we have decided to add an amount from our own funds to the compensation for this affected user so that they receive $4,100, as if your loss had matched the deposit amount rather than exceeding it by 10 times.

This time we are covering the difference, but we cannot do this indefinitely. That is precisely why this discussion is crucial for the community-to establish fairer and more transparent rules for the future and post them on the website. Furthermore, this will help other escrow services understand how to operate correctly and define their own rules to prevent further manipulation by scammers.