It appears you have not registered with our community. To register please click here ...

!!

Welcome to Russian Women Discussion - the most informative site for all things related to serious long-term relationships and marriage to a partner from the Former Soviet Union countries!

Please register (it's free!) to gain full access to the many features and benefits of the site. Welcome!

+-

Author Topic: Scammer Scorecard - Released  (Read 21386 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Daveman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5443
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouse's Country: Ukraine
  • Status: Married 0-2 years
  • Trips: > 10
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #50 on: December 20, 2007, 08:56:25 PM »
Okay, so I tried the test on myself and it came back with a score of -10 "you are too stupid to be in this pursuit"    Hmmmmmmmm

Actually I got "Probably not a scammer, but that incessant bleating will keep you awake at night"


The card is already 100% accurate in that it uses the terms "may" and "probably".

I think the greatest benefit is that a newbie will get that thought provoking answer and freak just enough to enter the forum and ask more specific questions.  That, IMO, would be the true power and service of the card.

Nice job, Sandro.

Dave
« Last Edit: December 20, 2007, 09:06:41 PM by Daveman »
The duty of a true patriot is to protect his country from its government. -- Thomas Paine

Offline Serebro

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 825
  • Gender: Female
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #51 on: December 20, 2007, 11:20:18 PM »
I decided to have this test for myself, I imagined what the man I am correspong with now would write.

1/she initiated the first contact-yes
2/she is younger than you-by 10 years
her letters:
3/acknowledge your remarks-always
4/answer your queries-always
5/say she is falling in love with you-4+letters(not yet :P)
6/contain explicity your name-yes
7/Show SUBJECT:'s/Re:'s corresponding to those in your preceding letters-no
8/consists of long texts about her only-no
9/are only sent through an agency-no
10/contain complaints about her condition-no
her profile:
11/Appears on more than 1 dating site under the SAME name-on 2-3
12-
13/Appears on anti-scam site(s)/forum(s)-0
her photos:
14/Show her in revealing clothing (e.g. mini bikini, transparent lingerie, etc.)-no
15/Show her in very little clothing, or no clothing at all.-no
her contact information:
16/Her email nickname contains part(s) of her name(s).-yes
17/She gives her phone number-yes
18/Her phone number is valid-yes
19/Having no personal phone, she arranges for alternative ways to talk to you.-yes
20/She gives her postal address-yes
21/Her postal address is valid-yes
HER PARTNER/RELATIONSHIP PRE-REQUISITES
22/Her partner's desired age range is above her age-6-10
23/Her partner should be well off, financially secure, successful, etc.-no
24/The type of relationship she offers : intimate, sex, etc.-no
25/The type of relationship she offers : any-no
HER NEEDS/REQUESTS
26/She hints at her need for generic help-no
27/ She hints a gift/gift(s) would be welcome-no
28/She asks for money-no


Her score-132
She may be a scammer
.

After changing the first point:

1/she initiated the first contact-yes
into no changes the situation into:
Her score:92
Perhaps she is not a scammer.


So writing a letter to the man whose profile I liked increases my score in 40 points and automatically brings me into the dangerous category.


At the same time when we tick in the box:
She hints at her need for generic help-yes will give the girl 142 points
 and brings her to the same category:
She may be a scammer
.

so the girl who doesn't hint at the need for generic help but only wrote the letter to the man she liked and the girl who wanted help from the man on a dating website have nearly the same amount of points and belong to the same category of possible scammers.
lovely...
« Last Edit: December 20, 2007, 11:31:54 PM by Serebro »

Offline Shadow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8743
  • Country: nl
  • Gender: Male
    • Family Fireplace
  • Spouse's Country: Russia
  • Status: Married > 10 years
  • Trips: > 10
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #52 on: December 21, 2007, 03:42:44 AM »
Both the first woman I visited and my fiancee are probable scammers. But that is not the idea of the card.  ;)
No it is not a dog. Its really how I look.  ;)

Offline Turboguy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6527
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouse's Country: Russia
  • Status: Married > 10 years
  • Trips: > 10
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #53 on: December 21, 2007, 05:19:19 AM »
Both the first woman I visited and my fiancee are probable scammers. But that is not the idea of the card.  ;)

There as been a lot of thought and work put into the card but even when they bring out a new car there are likely to be a few bugs and things that need tweeking.   The idea of the card is great.   The intent of the card is great.  I do think the more reliable the results the more good it is going to do.   

Without really knowing how much weight is given to the components it seems to me that the gal initiating contact is heavy and where she intiated contact from needs to be on there or weighted heaver.   For example I think a gal who contacts a guy on Elenas would not seem like a scammer to me but one who inititiates contact from Match.com is almost 100% going to be one.

Offline SANDRO43

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10550
  • Country: it
  • Gender: Male
    • Sandro's Website
  • Spouse's Country: No Selection
  • Status: No Selection
  • Trips: None (yet)
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #54 on: December 21, 2007, 05:46:55 AM »
I decided to have this test for myself, I imagined what the man I am correspong with now would write.
Serebro (and Turbo), you must have used the previous version (3.0) of the Card, I entered your answers in the new version (3.1), and obtained:

- 51 : Perhaps she is not a scammer

with 50 contributed by Question 7 (Show SUBJECT:'s/Re:'s corresponding to those in your preceding letters).

Maybe the answers to this question should not be just "Yes/No", but:
- Always/Often (0)
- Seldom (5)
- Never (50)

Thanks to you, too, for giving your time :D.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2007, 06:35:45 AM by SANDRO43 »
Milan's "Duomo"

Offline SANDRO43

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10550
  • Country: it
  • Gender: Male
    • Sandro's Website
  • Spouse's Country: No Selection
  • Status: No Selection
  • Trips: None (yet)
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #55 on: December 21, 2007, 05:59:31 AM »
... and where she intiated contact from needs to be on there or weighted heaver. For example I think a gal who contacts a guy on Elenas would not seem like a scammer to me but one who inititiates contact from Match.com is almost 100% going to be one.
True, Turbo, but that is rather hard to incorporate in the Card, I would have to maintain a list of "dubious" sites which would be subjectively debatable ;).

An alternative would be :
- From a reputable site (0)
- From a questionable site (50)

but, as we know, scammers may be present in reputable sites, too :(.
Milan's "Duomo"

Online BillyB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11892
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
    • Good Story
  • Spouse's Country: Ukraine
  • Status: Married 5-10 years
  • Trips: > 10
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #56 on: December 21, 2007, 09:57:22 AM »
Her score-132
She may be a scammer
.

After changing the first point:

1/she initiated the first contact-yes
into no changes the situation into:
Her score:92
Perhaps she is not a scammer.


So writing a letter to the man whose profile I liked increases my score in 40 points and automatically brings me into the dangerous category.

I think more weight should be given to a RW is a scammer if she contacted a man on an exclusive American or European website compared to if she uses an international dating/marriage site. Over 99% of RW contacting American men on American dating sites are scammers. Of course these scammers may not even be RW. Unfortunately there is no way to make a perfect scam card and if a sincere RW uses an American dating site to contact men, the scam card can't distinguish her from the other thousands of scammers who has a known habit of doing that kind of activity.

But overall, I think Sandro did a good  job on the scam card and ultimately if a man communicating with a RW has suspicions still after he uses the scam card, he can come seek more advice from the forum.
There are people that will pass info about you and your family. Do not share info about yourself or share photos as they can search for you on the internet and distribute what they found since they are allowed to participate here.

Offline Serebro

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 825
  • Gender: Female
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #57 on: December 21, 2007, 10:14:59 AM »
Serebro (and Turbo), you must have used the previous version (3.0) of the Card, I entered your answers in the new version (3.1), and obtained:

- 51 : Perhaps she is not a scammer

with 50 contributed by Question 7 (Show SUBJECT:'s/Re:'s corresponding to those in your preceding letters).

I didn't understand that question 100%...
Does this mean that I click reply and the subject of the message has "re:Hello,...." in it, meaning that I don't write my own subject or does it mean that I leave the previous letters answering this letter and the whole letter is long because you can read the whole correspondance in one letter?!

I answered yes as sometimes I don't write my own subject but just leave "Re:"the subject of the person I am corresponding with"."but I don't think I understand what exactly they meant with this question...
Now Sandro said that it's one of the main scammers recognising questions so I am qurious about its real meaning :D
« Last Edit: December 21, 2007, 10:19:23 AM by Serebro »

Offline SANDRO43

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10550
  • Country: it
  • Gender: Male
    • Sandro's Website
  • Spouse's Country: No Selection
  • Status: No Selection
  • Trips: None (yet)
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #58 on: December 21, 2007, 10:50:47 AM »
I didn't understand that question 100%...
Does this mean that I click reply and the subject of the message has "re:Hello,...." in it, meaning that I don't write my own subject or does it mean that I leave the previous letters answering this letter and the whole letter is long because you can read the whole correspondance in one letter?!
I answered yes as sometimes I don't write my own subject but just leave "Re:"the subject of the person I am corresponding with"."but I don't think I understand what exactly they meant with this question...
Now Sandro said that it's one of the main scammers recognising questions so I am qurious about its real meaning :D

Serebro, here's the corresponding explanation/tip:
Quote
QUESTION 7
MILD DANGER 
Scammers often use sets of pre-written letters. Inserting personalized information slows down their act, and may involve additional costs.
TIP
If your answer is NO: Keep changing SUBJECTs/Res in your future letters and watch if she changes hers."

Theoretically and logically, an email Subject/Re should be kept when replying on the same matter, and changed when no longer applicable, for example when moving on to discussing something else.

Admittedly, not everybody bothers to do that for various reasons (hurry, laziness, whatever), however in my experience scammers hardly ever do it for the quoted reasons, therefore this behaviour, if consistently repeated, is IMO an unmistakable red flag, and is treated accordingly in the Card.

A typical sequence:
1. Her 1st letter Subject: "Hi !"
2. My reply Subject: "Ciao !"
3. Her 2nd letter Subject: "Hi !" or, anyway, something else not "Ciao !"

This rules out hurry/laziness and means she's just noticed my reply in her inbox, probably did not even read it, and sent off her 'standard' 2nd letter ;).
« Last Edit: December 21, 2007, 11:02:08 AM by SANDRO43 »
Milan's "Duomo"

Offline Mander

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Country: nl
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouse's Country: Ukraine
  • Status: Looking 1-2 years
  • Trips: 1 - 3
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #59 on: March 21, 2012, 01:14:37 PM »
Would it be a good idea to include questions about:

  • Does the IP address match the womans location? (get sender IP from email header and trace in ripe.net database)
    Do the photo's look to good to be true?
    Do the photo's look as if made by a professional?
    Are the photo's numbered or do they show a sequence?
    Does she send photos with every email?
    Did she delete her profile from the dating site, after she established contact?

These seem important hints that something may be off.

One thing that I am not certain about which may or may not be good to include is:
  • Does she mention that she is using a translation agency?
Often this is the prelude for a translation agency costs notification. I think that if a woman mentions this, then its wise to seek alternative contact methods.

Offline SANDRO43

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10550
  • Country: it
  • Gender: Male
    • Sandro's Website
  • Spouse's Country: No Selection
  • Status: No Selection
  • Trips: None (yet)
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #60 on: March 21, 2012, 01:51:55 PM »
Thank you  for your comments, Mander, long time since we received any :D.

Would it be a good idea to include questions about:
Does the IP address match the womans location? (get sender IP from email header and trace in ripe.net database)
Not very significant, see our RWDpedia (http://russianwomendiscussion.com/mwiki/index.php/IP_Addresses_%26_All_That_Stuff).
Quote
Do the photo's look to good to be true?
Do the photo's look as if made by a professional?
Non-scammers also use good photos ;). Not a meaningful discriminant, IMO.
Quote
Are the photo's numbered or do they show a sequence?
1st question: I've never seen photo numbers, at most dates.
2nd question: could be part of a professional photo session, see above.
Quote
Does she send photos with every email?
This could be useful ::).
Quote
Did she delete her profile from the dating site, after she established contact?
Not damning in itself, only until after having established a sort of relationship for some time, I'd say.
Quote
One thing that I am not certain about which may or may not be good to include is: Does she mention that she is using a translation agency? Often this is the prelude for a translation agency costs notification. I think that if a woman mentions this, then its wise to seek alternative contact methods.
I've never see that mentioned beforehand. Have you?
Milan's "Duomo"

Offline Mander

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Country: nl
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouse's Country: Ukraine
  • Status: Looking 1-2 years
  • Trips: 1 - 3
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #61 on: March 21, 2012, 02:26:08 PM »
Thank you  for your comments, Mander, long time since we received any :D.
Indeed. Since it has been a long time and its nice to have such list of flags, I considered to throw in some ideas.

Not very significant, see our RWDpedia (http://russianwomendiscussion.com/mwiki/index.php/IP_Addresses_%26_All_That_Stuff).
A mismatch between the IP location and the location given by the woman does not mean that she is a scammer. However, the chance certainly goes up. For example: I received an email today from an Ukrainian woman said to be from Kherson. Her IP is not dynamic and shows a company in Amsterdam.  I think this is a reason to flag the message as suspect.

1st question: I've never seen photo numbers, at most dates.
I read a discussion about this here. And found that all photo's coming from confirmed scammers, start either with 1_ or are in sequence like:
1
1.1
1.1.1
1.1.1.1

This is said to denote the first batch of photo's, while the second batch starts with 2.

This could be useful ::).Not damning in itself, only until after having established a sort of relationship for some time, I'd say.
Yes, you are right. It should be worded better like you indicate:
Did she delete her profile from the dating site, shortly after she established contact?

I've had this happen several times with confirmed scammers and with possible scammers. To me it throws up a flag.

I've never see that mentioned beforehand. Have you?
Two ladies have mentioned that they do not know English and use a commercial translation agency. I may be wrong, but after reading about the common translation agency scam, it feels funny to me. But since communication is still fresh in both cases, I'm considering is as something that could be wrong. i.e. a flag, not a discriminant.

Offline SANDRO43

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10550
  • Country: it
  • Gender: Male
    • Sandro's Website
  • Spouse's Country: No Selection
  • Status: No Selection
  • Trips: None (yet)
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #62 on: March 21, 2012, 06:49:08 PM »
I received an email today from an Ukrainian woman said to be from Kherson. Her IP is not dynamic and shows a company in Amsterdam. I think this is a reason to flag the message as suspect.
I agree with you here. Normal 'Net users are assigned dynamic IP addresses by their providers, whereas a static IP address denotes a permanent entity such as an agency, and is therefore suspect at least of being 'agency-sponsored', or of mass mailing ;).
Milan's "Duomo"

Offline BdHvA

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 631
  • Country: nl
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouse's Country: Ukraine
  • Status: Married 0-2 years
  • Trips: No Selection
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #63 on: March 22, 2012, 03:13:51 AM »
Just saw this tool, Special K, comes out as; "She is probably a scammer".

My guess because I have met Katarina I think the tool is more useful in the very early stage of communication.
Experierence is not what happens to you. It is what you do with what happens to you. A. Huxley

Offline SANDRO43

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10550
  • Country: it
  • Gender: Male
    • Sandro's Website
  • Spouse's Country: No Selection
  • Status: No Selection
  • Trips: None (yet)
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #64 on: March 22, 2012, 07:24:46 AM »
My guess because I have met Katarina I think the tool is more useful in the very early stage of communication.
Yes, and to inexperienced WM: what is more helpful are its questions and related help, rather than its final score, because they may draw attention to aspects not previously considered or known ;).
Milan's "Duomo"

Offline Mappy

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 51
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouse's Country: No Selection
  • Status: No Selection
  • Trips: None (yet)
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #65 on: October 06, 2017, 10:40:52 PM »
Based on my current experience corresponding with a scammer, I suggest this scorecard needs a bit of updating.  The scams are now more sophisticated and are avoiding many of the old more obvious flags.

I got personal emails that responded to all my questions, using my name frequently and with headers responding to mine, lots of decent photos from someone living a good life who didn't complain about Russia, didn't mention money, expresssed reservations not love, volunteered her phone number, etc.  On the scorecard the result was "probably not a scammer".  Yet *she* was.

Over time lots of flags emerged, but for me an early signal was the pattern of correspondence - one long email every afternoon, never any rushed one-liners or quick responses to mine, even if I happened to mail back straight away.  Even allowing for a busy pressured life and the need to translate everything, that isn't the way anyone with a smartphone or home internet would communicate.  Clearly they work from an office and go through their contact list once each day.

Something about the timing and pattern of the email correspondence ('natural' v daily routine) would be a valuable question to add to the scorecard IMO.

Offline Boethius

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2023
  • Country: 00
  • Spouse's Country: No Selection
  • Status: No Selection
  • Trips: No Selection
Re: Scammer Scorecard - Released
« Reply #66 on: October 08, 2017, 02:24:08 PM »
I wouldn't necessarily take that particular pattern of communication as a red flag.  She could be a busy person, who just set aside a certain amount of time daily.  She may be at work and doesn't want to access personal emails from work.  She could have an OCD.  You are NO ONE to her until you visit, so patterns of communication are a useless criterion.
To love someone means to see him as God intended him. - Fyodor Dostoevksy

 

+-RWD Stats

Members
Total Members: 9975
Latest: FozertVot
New This Month: 6
New This Week: 2
New Today: 1
Stats
Total Posts: 491039
Total Topics: 19417
Most Online Today: 1305
Most Online Ever: 2480
(November 01, 2018, 05:22:05 PM)
Users Online
Members: 35
Guests: 1182
Total: 1217

+-Recent Posts

Re: Trippin in St Pete by ML
Today at 04:19:01 PM

Big Girls by ML
Today at 04:14:34 PM

Re: Why does your wife stay with you ? by GQBlues
Today at 03:31:26 PM

Re: Brexit good, bad or indifferent? by Trenchcoat
Today at 03:23:07 PM

Re: Time for some Humor!! by msmob
Today at 03:05:08 PM

What Social Network for Ukraine? by Trenchcoat
Today at 03:02:56 PM

Re: Trippin in St Pete by msmob
Today at 02:57:22 PM

Re: Translation services from English to Russian and Russian to English by msmob
Today at 02:49:28 PM

Re: Brexit good, bad or indifferent? by msmob
Today at 02:47:53 PM

Re: Translation services from English to Russian and Russian to English by Trenchcoat
Today at 02:35:42 PM

Powered by EzPortal

create account