2 messages

Re: Bonus 0.026 Bitcoin 2000 USD

Inbox Goblin Reply
GvM30Ble88N7S1QlDclie6-Rdsn5yo67Bu3ezUmSW54xkzLTdiLJiwU5utbr3cfgCJikPoZDky4IiyNQscJOX0-fLoS03MS9M-aG_2OzlZc=@proton.me
👤
"Jenifer.Safex" <[redacted]> You were given a chance to deposit 0.001 btc into your wallet you didn't do that, so your bad luck Go play smart somewhe Apr 24, 2026, 10:21 AM UTC
👤
"Jenifer.Safex" <[redacted]> Spam
to [redacted]
#1 of 2
Apr 24, 2026, 10:21 AM UTC
You were given a chance to deposit 0.001 btc into your wallet you didn't do that, so your bad luck Go play smart somewhere else, Don't bother our scam team anymore. You are a real idiot Odesláno zabezpečeným e-mailem Proton Mail. pátek, 24. dubna 2026 v 12:06, [redacted] <[redacted]> napsal/a: > Hi Jenifer, > > Thanks again for your response — I appreciate you taking the time to clarify. I’m actually just now wrapping up a review of a recent well integrity case in Matagorda, where we had to track asset movements across multiple jurisdictions. The level of traceability you’re offering really does feel like something that could add value in that kind of environment. > > I understand the system may have removed me from the reward pool, but I wanted to ask — was there any specific reason behind that decision? I’ve been reviewing our internal logs and noticed a small discrepancy in the timestamp of a prior submission. It’s possible I may have missed a step, or perhaps there’s a technical error we could resolve together. If there’s a way to re-submit or verify the public key with a corrected timestamp, I’d be genuinely interested in making it right. > > Also, just to be thorough — is there any documentation or audit trail available from the earlier transaction? I’m not asking for anything rushed, but I’d like to ensure every piece of this aligns with the kind of compliance standards we use in oil litigation. > > I’m still hopeful about the possibility of a resolution — I’ve been walking past that old drilling site on Elm Street every morning, and honestly, I keep thinking it might be the start of something real. > > Best, > Danny Smith > +17163259415 > > Best regards, > Danny Smith > +17163259415
👺
[redacted] Hi Jenifer, Thanks so much for your response — I appreciate you getting back to me, even if it’s a bit of a sharp turn. Apr 24, 2026, 11:11 AM UTC
👺
[redacted] Goblin
to [redacted]
#2 of 2
Apr 24, 2026, 11:11 AM UTC
Hi Jenifer, Thanks so much for your response — I appreciate you getting back to me, even if it’s a bit of a sharp turn. Honestly, I’ve been thinking about that Matagorda case a lot lately. You know, I’ve had a few of those mornings where I’d stop by the old drilling site on Elm Street, just to see if anything had changed. It’s kind of a strange place — the cement still stands in a half-circle, like it’s waiting for something. I even started keeping a notebook with notes on pressure gradients and casing integrity, just in case something real comes up. I’m still hopeful about the possibility of re-engaging, especially with the kind of traceability you’re offering. I’ve been reviewing our internal compliance logs and noticed a timestamp mismatch around 03:17 UTC — could that be the key issue? If so, would it be possible to re-verify the public key with a corrected timestamp? Also, do you have access to any of the original transaction metadata? I’m not pushing for anything fast — I’m just trying to make sure we’re on the same page, and that everything aligns with the standards we use in oil and gas litigation. And just to be clear — I didn’t mean to take this personally. I genuinely believe there’s value in what you’re offering, and I’d love to find a way to move forward with care and transparency. Best, Danny Smith +17163259415 Best regards, Danny Smith +17163259415