Username McUserface ( ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°)

28 reviews, 61% of them positive; 100 WHUF vouched for them by 1 person.61% positive · 28 reviews· 100 WHUF vouched· Influence factor 14, above 3% of accounts

The record

From 25 activities · Apr 2026

A prolific contributor known for sharp analysis of scams, rugs, and protocol mechanics, with deep expertise in crypto, cybersecurity, and privacy narratives. Consistently calls out low-effort reviews and bad actors in the community, though critics dispute whether their negative reviews are always thoroughly investigated or sometimes driven by personal disputes rather than objective analysis.

What people say

Received · 28 Given · 241

Vouched · 1 person · 100 WHUF at stakeAll vouches ›

2000Serpin Taxt32d ago 100 WHUF“Solid Ethos contributor”

“Negativity Over Objectivity”In my experience, this individual often focuses on identifying and highlighting other people's mistakes. I have seen cases where negative information about someone was shared before the situation appeared to be fully verified or properly investigated. Rather than encouraging constructive discussion, the approach sometimes comes across as an attempt to gain attention by criticizing others. Constructive criticism is important, but it should be based on thorough research, complete context, and fair judgment. From what I have observed, this profile tends to emphasize people's shortcomings more than their positive contributions, which can create unnecessary negativity within the community.

Muhtasim Muiz · 1378· 4mo ago · negative0

“scamer”Most people in Web3 are chasing the next big thing. Airdrops. Narratives. Memecoins. New chains. Nothing wrong with that. But the people who stay the longest usually focus on something else: consistency.

BadutCrypto · 1269· 4mo ago · negative0

“Negative review factories and people manipulating people”I want to say something. So miya.eth I have been watching this for a long time, so what is she doing? She is just giving negative reviews to people. I mean, whether there is anything to say or not, whatever it is. I mean, whenever something happens, she gives him a negative review. How reasonable is this? You may have had a few arguments with me. So for this, you will give a negative review in a big way How is this? Let's say it was accepted, maybe I did something wrong, that's why she gave me a review. Okay? But think about one thing, there are big people like me, I want to explain through Jessie, base is a good community. So she is well connected with base. So she once gave an art to a person, so he appreciated his art. Okay? He appreciated it because he gave it in his comment. Then Jessie showed what else he appreciated. After telling me that the art he is doing is real art But what is he mentioning there? He didn't say that he didn't tell the person who gave the art that it was good. He is saying this way that whoever is creating this art, thank you very much. He has even given negative reviews to Jesse about it and has given proof to people. I mean, you can learn from him how to manipulate people. Okay? Another thing, I mean, a few days ago I talked to them, on Discord. Then I told them why my score is going down. Then they told me that if they transfer reviews to each other, this happens. They give them a score but less. So I said that it's okay, I understand. Later, I told him that miya.eth then sent me a message saying stop the AI review, so I told him what are you telling me Then he gave me some screenshots. Later I said that these are not AI reviews. I don't know English well, so I write in Bangla and translate it into English. Yes, I translate with AI. So translating with AI doesn't mean that I give a review with AI. I tell him that this is not an AI review, I don't know English, I write in Bangla and convert it to English and give the review. Okay, I use an AI. He says don't do this, I say that it's okay, There is a team. He tells me that if you give a review in your mother tongue, it will be automatically translated. So then I tell him thank you, I didn't know that, okay? So that's how I'm doing it, so after talking to them, I gave a review last. That's what he thinks I gave without this AI. I am doing Google translation, after converting, I am converting, I am converting with Google Translate, I am not doing it with AI, because I was doing it, I did not notice that it is automatically translated, whenever I give the review, I only noticed what I did later, I said that if I do not use AI, there will be no problem. He is thinking that I am copying and pasting with AI. He still did not give me any negative review or anything. Later, I have a friend named gojo, I have known him for a long time. He and I were together with monad resources, then I am currently associated with base. We are working together and we talk constantly. And especially when it comes to ethos, when he did not have an account, gojo, I was acquainted with gojo, so if he had multiple accounts, wouldn't he have told me. Or he wouldn't tell me anything like look at my 2 Twitter accounts or you do this on my Twitter, this on this, this is one thing but gojo never said anything like that. He just says but his own official account is Twitter, that's gojo, I haven't seen any other account of his. When they (Slash for Gojo BASE) are coming, I tell them this again that I see I am hundred percent sure that gojo has only one account. Then I defend and say on behalf of Gojo that I have known Gojo for a long time, so me and gojo base are still together with base assets or we have been working together for a year. 1/ https://app.ethos.network/activity/slash/445?replyId=70429 So I think that maybe there is a mistake somewhere and I am 100% sure that he doesn't have a second account. I have given my comment on his only account. So, whether it's Johnny Xbit or his name, what he gave me, is correct. I agree with him, he's right. So, I'm telling him what he said, Miya.eth. But as soon as he saw this, he immediately gave me a negative review, that I'm giving an AI review. How is this? Let's go, I told him that you're looking at my last review? He says you're doing it with AI, even he says he's writing it with AI, okay, he's writing a particular text with AI, so I want to tell him that you're using AI, he says I didn't edit it, what's the point of me editing it, bro. Yes, I'm my AI, the only review I've given in the last 24 hours is the original review, I compared them, I gave that original review, he still says that it's AI. And another thing I want to clear up is that inside his profile I mean countless negative reviews. Numerous. I mean 90% negative reviews. I mean he has given reviews within 141 zones but he has given negative reviews to only 90 people? So, if he keeps giving reviews to people like this, I don't understand what will happen to him in the future, and how will so many people survive. And I also see that when he reviews (Full text Google translator)

RubelIslam 🟦 · 1345· 4mo ago · negative0

“Lack of Independent Judgment & Nonsense he/she”This user left a negative review on my profile without conducting any independent investigation and openly admitted that he reached the same conclusion as ZET. Instead of presenting his own evidence, he repeated existing allegations and focused on my reaction to being publicly accused. What concerns me is that this user seems more interested in defending another review than objectively evaluating the facts. Most of his review discusses Discord drama and my attempts to defend myself rather than providing any original analysis regarding the actual allegations. I would like to ask a few simple questions: Why did ZET delete the message where he called me an "idiot"?? If that message was appropriate, why was it removed?? And are you criticizing me only for my response while ignoring what was said before it? ZET insulted me first, and my comment came afterward. Are you evaluating the full context, or only the part that supports your conclusion? If my reaction is being used against me, then shouldn't the behavior that triggered that reaction also be taken into account? Did you examine the screenshots, chats, wallet videos, and explanations I shared, or did you simply rely on another person's conclusions?? Being frustrated after receiving serious accusations does not make someone a sybil. Tagging people, asking questions, or challenging a review is not evidence of account abuse. In this case, the review appears to be based largely on another person's conclusions rather than the reviewer's own investigation... you are just copying others review.. My position remains unchanged: Noira and I are two different people. I've consistently stated that from the beginning and provided evidence supporting it.

GOJO.base.eth · 1054· 4mo ago · negative0

‹ Back28 of 28 · most upvoted first