melo What he did. What he said. What the evidence shows.

Who Is melo — And What Did He Actually Do?

Before anything else, it is worth being blunt about who we are talking about. melo is a Discord user who, over an extended period of time, built a reputation in certain communities while quietly running a campaign of harassment, manipulation, and targeted abuse against multiple people. He was not provoked into this. He was not acting in self-defence. He later admitted himself that every single thing he did was motivated by revenge for a prior server ban.

That confession is the most important single fact in this entire document. Everything you will read below — the doxxing, the threats, the slurs, the coordinated planning, the fake evidence — was premeditated revenge, not an emotional reaction. He planned it, he organised it with others, and he carried it out across months.

This page covers his conduct in full. If you believed his version of events, or if you were one of the people who defended him or dismissed the people calling him out — this is for you. Not to argue with you. Just to show you what was actually happening.

The Full Charge Record

The following table lists every verified action on record against melo, ordered by severity. Each charge is supported by evidence linked or embedded in the sections below.

The Doxxing — Real People. Real Information. Real Threats.

The most serious thing melo did was doxx someone. Not metaphorically. Not as a figure of speech. He was directly involved in obtaining a user's personal information — including cell phone numbers belonging to that user and their family members — and distributing it. This was done alongside the group that was banned under DDA Case ID-17, a group with a documented history of exactly this type of predatory behaviour.

What makes this worse than a standard doxxing incident is what came next. The victim was told, explicitly, that if they chose to report what had happened, more information would be released and the harassment would continue. This is coercion. It is designed to make the victim feel that silence is their only safe option.

The victim came forward anyway. That took real courage, and it is the reason this record exists.

The Spig Doxxing Attempt

Separately, melo made attempts to obtain and expose the personal information of another individual known as Spig, including their old phone number. The coordination for this happened privately. However, melo's own public messages in a Discord #discussion channel make his involvement impossible to deny.

When the word "doxxed" was searched in that channel, six results came back — all of them melo's own messages. These include him writing "I 'doxxed spig'", using the Turkish phrase "doxx kardu" (meaning "I doxxed"), and "How I was banned for doxxing." The sarcastic framing does not change what was said. Additionally, BruTaL explicitly called for a ban, stating "@melo doxxed spig."

Exhibit — Public Admission, Spig Doxxing

EV-MELO-002

Discord #discussion channel searched for "doxxed." Six results returned, all melo's own messages. Visible: "I 'doxxed spig'", "Doxx kardu" (Turkish: "I doxxed"), "How I was banned for doxxing." BruTaL's message at the top explicitly states "@melo doxxed spig" and calls for a ban. The self-referential and sarcastic framing does not negate the public acknowledgment of the events.

The Planning — He Organised This. It Was Not Spontaneous.

One of the most important pieces of evidence in this entire record is a screenshot captured from a private Discord group chat called "CRAZY SHI." This screenshot makes clear that melo was not acting impulsively. He was planning. He was coordinating. And he knew exactly what he was doing.

In this conversation, melo explicitly states he does not want to get caught doxxing someone "unless im doing it mself" — meaning his only hesitation was about attribution, not about whether doxxing was acceptable. He also tells another member to use evidence that he himself provided, and then suggests they "could use AI to generate more."

Another member of the group chat — identified as "ducc" — panics when the conversation turns to doxxing. He writes: "btw if this gc gets reported i have no shi to do w this didnt do anything except for giving out legal advice." He knows what's being planned is reportable. melo's response to this concern is to dismiss it entirely: "nigga dw."

This screenshot was captured while melo and others were also assembling a defamation folder against an unrelated third party. The suggestion to use AI to generate evidence appears to have been made in that context — meaning melo was considering fabricating material to supplement real screenshots that didn't fully support his narrative. Whether AI-generated content was ultimately used has not been confirmed, but the intent was stated plainly in his own words.

Exhibit — "CRAZY SHI" Group Chat: Doxxing Planning & AI Fake Evidence

EV-MELO-001

Private Discord group chat "CRAZY SHI." melo states: "i don't wanna get caught doxxing him unless im doing it mself" — a direct expression of intent. He tells another member to use evidence he provided and suggests using AI to "generate more." Member "ducc" panics and tries to distance himself. melo dismisses the concern. This is premeditated, coordinated, and self-aware conduct — he knew it was wrong and planned around that rather than stopping.

Harassment, Slurs & Telling People to Kill Themselves

The conduct documented in DDA Case ID-21 — reproduced in full at the bottom of this page — covers the breadth of melo's harassment campaign. The headline points: he repeatedly used the n-word directed at specific individuals, not as ambient background language but directed at people. He made vile remarks about users' families. He told multiple people to kill themselves or harm themselves. He spread misinformation through direct messages to shift community opinion against people he had grievances with.

None of this was venting frustration in the heat of a single argument. It was a sustained campaign across multiple servers, against multiple individuals, over an extended period. The people who experienced it did not misinterpret casual banter. They were targeted, repeatedly, by someone who had decided to make them pay for something they did — which, by melo's own admission, was simply being part of a server that banned him.

The self-harm incitement is worth calling out specifically. Telling someone to kill themselves or to harm themselves in the context of coordinated harassment is not just rude. It is potentially dangerous. Some of the people on the receiving end of this kind of campaign — across this or any other situation — are already in difficult places. melo knew what he was doing and did it anyway.

On the Misinformation

An underappreciated part of melo's approach was the misinformation spread through DMs. Rather than just attacking people in public, he was privately messaging people — people who trusted him, people who were mutual friends or contacts — and feeding them false or misleading versions of events. This is how he maintained support in communities where his targets also had friends. It is also how people ended up defending him without realising they were being fed a constructed narrative.

If you were one of those people — if you defended melo because of things he told you privately about why certain people deserved what was happening to them — you were not stupid. You were deliberately misled. That is on him, not on you.

Extended Evidence Gallery

The following twelve exhibits come from the extended proof collection. Each documents a specific aspect of melo's conduct. Click any image to open the full-size viewer. All images link back to their original hosted source on ibb.co.

Extended Proof Collection — 12 Exhibits

Click to expand · Keyboard: ← → Esc

↗

#1 Check the date

↗

#2 Very respectful indeed

↗

#3 You need something, come to me

↗

#4 The estimates about pool usage

↗

#5 Additional evidence

↗

#6 Part 2

↗

#7 Check the date (2)

↗

#8 Trying to do RMT — I didn't help

↗

#9 The so-called "clean guy"

↗

#10 Telling about his alt

↗

#11 His 1 trillion claim

↗

#12 Toxicity reports from others

Images hosted on ibb.co — click thumbnail to open fullscreen viewer View full album ↗

All Evidence Links

DDA Case ID-21 — Official Record

The following is the full official DDA Case ID-21 record reproduced verbatim. This record was issued by the DDA and is not authored by the contributors to this document. It is included here in full for complete transparency.

Spig's Statement — Addressing the Claims

Once you have reviewed the video, we will address the doxxing claims currently being circulated.
The individual shown in the doxxing photo is not me, which has also been confirmed by members of the same team that was previously working with Melo. A screenshot of that statement has been included below for reference.

Additionally, several server owners already have me added on WhatsApp and are familiar with my identity, so there is no confusion regarding whether the image belongs to me. The reason this point is being clarified here is because it confirms that a doxxing incident did occur, regardless of whether the targeted individual even was someone else. The act of publicly sharing someone’s private information without consent is still a serious violation and will be included as part of the documentation being prepared.

Regarding the statement that “the FBI does not handle cases outside the USA,” you may want to review how the IC3 (Internet Crime Complaint Center) operates in cross-border cybercrime matters before making such claims. You also mentioned that the worst possible outcome would be a $100 fine. That assumption is incorrect. Such actions may fall under criminal defamation and cyber harassment provisions, including Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code, as well as applicable provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 because you are reportedly a minor, the matter would fall under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, meaning it would be handled through the appropriate juvenile legal procedures.

Under Indian law:

IPC Sections 499 & 500 (Defamation) Spreading false accusations that harm a person's reputation may constitute criminal defamation.
Punishment: up to 2 years imprisonment, fine, or both.
If the accused is a minor, the case proceeds through the juvenile justice system.

Information Technology Act, 2000
Acts such as doxxing and the unauthorized sharing of personal information may fall under provisions including:
• Section 66E – Violation of privacy (publishing private images or personal information without consent)
• Section 67 – Transmission or publication of obscene material online
• Section 72 – Breach of confidentiality and privacy

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
the following procedures apply:
• A complaint can be registered and investigated by authorities
• The matter is placed before the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB)
• Guardians are formally notified
• The Board conducts a preliminary assessment, examining factors such as:
– the mental capacity to commit the offence
– the ability to understand the consequences
– the circumstances surrounding the act
– whether the conduct was planned or intentional

Given the evidence indicating extended planning, coordination, and awareness of the conduct involved, which gives a tick on all the pre assesment done for a crime to be considered heinous or not in a children's court considering the individual Certain material within the report may raise concerns relating to provisions under laws protecting minors, including the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) these circumstances will be included in the documentation being prepared and preserved for submission through the appropriate cybercrime reporting channels and relevant authorities.

Statement Images

Additional Evidence

Proofs regarding NSFW material and malware spread attempt:

NSFW & Malware Evidence

If You Believed Him — That's On Him, Not You.

melo is good at one thing: constructing a version of events that makes him look like the victim. He did it through DMs, through community drama, through half-truths that were just plausible enough to make people pick a side. If you were one of those people, you were not wrong to listen. You were working with the information you had. The problem was that the information came from him.

What this document shows is what he was doing on the other side of those conversations. While telling you one thing, he was in a private group chat talking about not wanting to get caught doxxing someone. While presenting himself as someone being treated unfairly, he was distributing a real person's phone number. While positioning himself as a victim of a smear campaign, he was suggesting they use AI to generate fake evidence for one.

The evidence is here. It is not selective. It is not manipulated. It is screenshots of his own words, in his own conversations, saying exactly what he intended to do and what he did. That is the whole case.

Compiled by Spig, Lynn, and Prince — March 2026 — Document: WIT-2026-001-MELO