Talk:ShadowCrew

Comments

- REVIEW PROCESS

Untitled

There's a sentence in the first section that says "The site worked on a review process" or something along those lines. The next sentence starts "If you had a XXXX or XXXX to sell, or a XXXX service..." and it just continues with about 20 different replacements for XXXX. That makes for a really tedious sentence, for one- when you give an example, you don't need to include every freaking possibility. Four would have been more than plenty and a bit tedious itself. THAT'S NOT EVEN THE WORST PART- it just ENDS. It doesn't finish what the "if" is. I assume it was supposed to explain the review process, guessing by the way it was set up- but who knows? All it is now is a pointless list of everything that was ever sold there

---

Nobody has ever discussed how many of the 4000 members were police or fraud prevention personel. Or just observers for that matter.

Someone needs to also update what happened to those arrested, etc. - Someone needs to re-seed that Archive. Its full of holes and errors.... Anyone?

Later, Tribute. -

What is this about?

This article is not terribly useful without some kind of context. 69.30.112.10 00:31, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

-

citation needed

- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.112.178.223 (talk) 04:46, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I was doing some research on SC and other carder sites for a blog article and found this site: http://afterlife.wordpress.com/2006/07/12/carding-web-sites/

There are numerous posts from August and September that would seem to indicate that thegrifters site or at least the El Mariachi guy was and/or is still around. I can't get to the site now, but it looks like it was still up as of mid to late 2006.

El Mariachi is certainly still around and running his site TheGrifters.net. Several have spoken to him confirming he is at least active in early 2007.

According to the wired story here: http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,72515-0.html El Marachi and TheGrifters.net were run by the FBI.

---

"Administration"

In the "Administration" section of the article, the sentence that starts "If you had items you would like to sell..." just ends up rambling on without resolving itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.128.180 (talk) 02:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Counterfeitlibrary Shadowcrew Refugees

My nick is Assweasel on Shadowcrew

          Phoenix   on CounterfeitLibrary
          bearez on Counterfeitersguild.

I had actually left the scene after the demise of CounterfeitLibrary I was a bit dismayed as to the blatant credit card, egold, e-bay etc scams that were going on and new that Law enforcement were not far behind.

These earlier boards were created to share info on how to make fake ID's and if they had stayed out of the cID theft and credit card ripoffs would probably still be around today.

I manufactured ID's from several states and sold them on the boards. Someone wanting an Id to do a bit of underage drinking or a woman escaping an abusive husband seemed to be pretty harmless and that is what i confined myself to.

I was probably the most respected vendor that ever hit the scene and got myself out well in advance of Law enforcement. there were a number of ppl that confined themselves to basically what i was doing and oddly enough none of us has had any trouble with Law Enforcement. the worst i suffered was a seizure of my equipment. I suppose that this came as a result of Gollumfun snitching. No one had my address other than him.

I had sent some money to his wife so she could go buy my daughter a 4ft princess barbie in the US that was not available in canada. Anyhow they raided my farm when i wasn't there and grabbed my gear.

Anyhow if anyone is doing research on this i have insider knowledge of what went on. And as the Staute of Limitations has run out i don't mind talking about it.

Don't be asking for any ID'S. I quit making them after 911. just the thought of the possibility of selling to the likes of the ATTA gang was quite sobering to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.102.104.34 (talk) 20:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to ask you a few questions if you happen to see this. I used to be on SC long ago and as you mentioned, I had originally come there looking for "novelty" ID's. I remember a user named KEVLAR with MI cards...anyways, if you can contact me that would be great. You can post on my talk page or some other way and I will give you my email/contact info. jlcoving (talk) 23:49, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Wasn't the etiquette at the time something along the lines of "If you look like an Arab, we're not helping you"? 124.190.154.40 (talk) 18:42, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

=======================

Deck- Are we ever going to fix the inaccuracies in this wiki. The amount of edit's is insane, also please explain to me how you can found something that preexists ones involvement.

PS: Who ever scrubbed "Kidd Seth Sanders)" grats on the revisionist history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Decknomore (talk • contribs) 02:38, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

This article was useless

Made some edits that requested citations, many of the claims were clearly made by people desiring to limit their exposure or downplay the criminal activities of this group. Also removed several overly biased and unsourced claims that were making the article into a propaganda piece for the criminals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.8.57.37 (talk) 03:38, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Complete Rewrite - Post Here Anything Useful To Improve The Article

This article is in the process of being completely rewritten, so if you see something out of place or grammar/empty sections, feel free to move them or fill them, just please don't delete referenced material because you disagree with what is said. We will try to get everybody's POV mashed up to get a nice neutral article.

All unreferenced information will slowly be removed and replaced with information found in credible sources. If you would like to contribute, but don't feel like hunting for references, put your suggestions here. I've put in different sections to untangle the mess of unrelated sentences that composed the article. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 21:35, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Just wanted to drop a note stating that I took time to add references to every request for citation and reformatted the article into a more appropriate format. Jeremy112233 (talk) 00:44, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Details about this stuff

Almost everything that has "citation needed" next to it in this article can be found in Kevin Poulsen's book "Kingpin", which is pretty exhaustive (and certainly not flattering) in its documentation of ShadowCrew and its contemporaries. It's well worth a read, though I can't say I care enough to provide the references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.253.86.183 (talk) 21:10, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Number of Users

"The last available page before October 27, 2004 on archive.org[5] shows 2,709 registered members. Even this number is not an accurate estimate of the true number of members as registration was free, so the number could easily exceed those stated."

"as registration was free, so the number could easily exceed those stated." apparently whoever wrote that did not understand was registration means. Some people just don't understand who forums work. It annoys the hell out of me, but its not surprising. I am going to remove that sentence. Anyone who understands how industry standard forum software (example: vBulletin) works knows that a member is someone who has signed up, and that the number of "members" CANNOT exceed that number, typically listed at the bottom or top of each page, because that number counts the number of people who have signed up, with a username, for the website. Free or not, that number cannot be exceeded.68.6.76.31 (talk) 04:00, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on ShadowCrew. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060925234919/http://www.ussc.gov/2004guid/2b1_1.htm to http://www.ussc.gov/2004guid/2b1_1.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090117135809/http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/nj/press/files/pdffiles/firewallindct1028.pdf to http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/nj/press/files/pdffiles/firewallindct1028.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050522001128/http://yahoo.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_22/b3935001_mz001.htm to http://yahoo.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_22/b3935001_mz001.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:22, 2 January 2018 (UTC)