John Mateer's Venmo gambling ‘controversy' was so stupidly avoidable
If you use the mobile payment system known as Venmo, you should, unequivocally and absolutely, have all of your transactions set to private. Every single one of them. No one, perhaps outside of your significant other and professional financial advisor, needs to know how much you spent on margaritas last Thursday night. No one else needs to know the diabolical amount of money you're spending on rent with a house emoji and a smiley face. No one needs to directly see the irresponsible late-evening debauchery you partake in now and then. Venmo is NOT supposed to be a social media platform in any shape or form.
So ... (Inhales, takes a beat.)
NO ONE NEEDS TO KNOW HOW YOU SPEND YOUR MONEY. AT ALL. NO ONE. It's just the smart thing to do, especially if you're a public figure. Why let anyone be privy to such an intimate part of your existence?
Evidently, no one informed Oklahoma quarterback John Mateer that his public Venmo transactions could lead to a gambling "controversy," which he could have easily avoided in the first place. In an effort to diffuse this simmering mess, Mateer issued a statement to his X account claiming that the Venmo transactions literally everyone could see were essentially just "inside jokes" between friends.
Look, he's 20, so the excuse is plausible. Most 20-year-olds probably aren't thinking things like this all the way through. Think back to when you were that age and all the silly, mindless antics you got up to. Potential consequences for any of your actions aren't really considered when you're that age. By that same token, since Mateer didn't think this through enough as the famous starting quarterback of a major college football program (cough, cough), well, that's why he now has to make statements like this in the first place.
You reap what you sow:
Venmo lets you set your transactions to private for a reason, man! It's a setting that Mateer and everyone else on the application should use without hesitation. Full stop.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Juggling Multiple High-Paying Jobs Is Risky Business. One Overemployment Veteran Says There's One Mistake That Can End It All
For some workers, one full-time job isn't enough. They're quietly taking on two, three or even more high-paying roles at the same time, a practice known as overemployment. But with bigger paychecks comes bigger risks, and one veteran says there's one slip-up that can ruin everything. Double-Booked Meetings Are The No. 1 Danger In a viral post on Reddit's r/overemployed forum, one contributor recently shared 20 rules from five years of working multiple jobs. They've been caught once before, and it was for the same mistake that takes down most people. Don't Miss: The same firms that backed Uber, Venmo and eBay are investing in this pre-IPO company disrupting a $1.8T market — 'Scrolling To UBI' — Deloitte's #1 fastest-growing software company allows users to earn money on their phones. You can "Avoid double meetings at ALL costs. It's the No. 1 way people get caught, including me. Use a sick day if needed," the poster wrote. The survival guide covers everything from using separate devices for each job to avoiding shared human resources systems. The poster recommends completely separate laptops, webcams, keyboards and phones for each role, instead of juggling accounts on a single machine. They also change notification sounds, block off calendar time to separate each job's hours, label devices to avoid mix-ups, and use preferred names so coworkers can't link profiles across companies. They caution against letting a company install device management on a personal phone, using a real headshot in Slack or Teams, which are popular workplace communication platforms, or sharing payroll logins between jobs. "If they want to manage your device, they should provide a separate phone," the post said. Trending: If there was a new fund backed by Jeff Bezos offering a ? LinkedIn And Legal Risks When it comes to LinkedIn, the advice is to create a burner account with no photo and strict privacy settings. Others in the thread disagreed, saying they've simply hibernated their main account without issue. One commenter noted, "You raise more red flags by having different LinkedIn accounts, with different versions of your name." The post also stresses that if an employer catches on, you should never admit to overemployment. "That lets them fire you immediately with no severance," it said. Instead, it suggests mentioning "tortious interference" and possibly contacting legal counsel. Other Survival Tactics The list also includes avoiding overlapping jobs that use the same HR systems, steering clear of multiple active health insurance plans that might prompt questions, and never listing both jobs on a mortgage application. For those facing a return-to-office mandate, documented accommodations like a therapist's note, caregiver responsibilities or religious practices can keep you in the comments offered their own tips—from working for companies in different time zones to create natural schedule gaps, to always prioritizing the original job, to using visual mute indicators to avoid being overheard on the wrong call. Despite the risks, the original poster remains confident the payoff is worth it. "The risk of a sudden layoff from a single job is FAR greater than the risk of being caught," they wrote. "With OE, a layoff or termination is a minor setback, leaving you with another income stream and a powerful financial cushion." Read Next: In a $34 Trillion Debt Era, The Right AI Could Be Your Financial Advantage — Imagn Images UNLOCKED: 5 NEW TRADES EVERY WEEK. Click now to get top trade ideas daily, plus unlimited access to cutting-edge tools and strategies to gain an edge in the markets. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? APPLE (AAPL): Free Stock Analysis Report TESLA (TSLA): Free Stock Analysis Report This article Juggling Multiple High-Paying Jobs Is Risky Business. One Overemployment Veteran Says There's One Mistake That Can End It All originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Dave Ramsey Caller Says Her Husband Won't Tell Her How Much He Makes—'Make Sure He's Not Taking Debt Out In Your Name'
A woman from Salt Lake City called into 'The Ramsey Show' with Dr. John Delony and George Kamel recently to share her struggle: after one year of marriage, her husband still refuses to share any financial information with her. She said this lack of transparency has been there since they began dating and has never improved. 'Behavior Is A Language' Mallory, the caller, told the hosts she doesn't know her husband's income, debts, or spending habits. When she asks, he avoids giving real answers, saying things like, 'It varies' or 'Probably the same as you.' Kamel was surprised by how little she knew about her husband's finances. 'You know nothing about this guy when it comes to money?' he asked. 'Correct,' she replied. Don't Miss: The same firms that backed Uber, Venmo and eBay are investing in this pre-IPO company disrupting a $1.8T market — 'Scrolling To UBI' — Deloitte's #1 fastest-growing software company allows users to earn money on their phones. You can Delony made it clear that such secrecy rarely exists in isolation, asking, 'Where are other areas where your gut just knows something's not right?' Mallory admitted she had once caught him texting another woman. The couple's financial arrangement mirrors that of roommates. 'We split the rent 50/50, we split utilities 50/50, and we split our child's daycare 50/50,' Mallory explained. They have no joint accounts, and each pays their own half directly. 'What you just described is how I lived with every roommate I've ever had,' Kamel said, stressing that this is far from a normal marriage structure. Mallory tried to move toward financial openness by booking a meeting with a financial advisor, but her husband canceled at the last minute despite previously agreeing. She has also found collections notices with his name on them and said she has been unable to get a copy of their joint tax return from his CPA. Trending: If there was a new fund backed by Jeff Bezos offering a ? Delony compared this to his own experience: 'Just so you know, George and I got our taxes done at the same place this year, and we walked out with our return.' To which Kamel added, 'And I walked out with my spouse, who was there the whole time.' He noted that her situation made him even more concerned: 'Mallory, I'm so sorry you're dealing with this.' Delony cut to the chase: 'You do not have a marriage. Do you get that?' He continued, 'Behavior is a language. He's being very clear with you: I do not want to build a life with you.' He also gave a pointed warning: 'Make sure he's not taking debt out in your name.'The hosts urged her to pull her credit report, freeze her credit, and monitor it closely. They pointed out that once married, her husband has access to her Social Security number and could open accounts without her knowledge. This, they said, made protecting her financial identity urgent. It's not just about having separate bank accounts, Delony explained. 'You're dealing with a person who's untrustworthy.' In the end, Delony concluded the call by telling her, 'It's not a healthy marriage, is what we're telling you,' making it clear that the money issues were symptoms of a deeper problem in the relationship. Read Next: In a $34 Trillion Debt Era, The Right AI Could Be Your Financial Advantage — UNLOCKED: 5 NEW TRADES EVERY WEEK. Click now to get top trade ideas daily, plus unlimited access to cutting-edge tools and strategies to gain an edge in the markets. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? APPLE (AAPL): Free Stock Analysis Report TESLA (TSLA): Free Stock Analysis Report This article Dave Ramsey Caller Says Her Husband Won't Tell Her How Much He Makes—'Make Sure He's Not Taking Debt Out In Your Name' originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.
UPI
10 hours ago
- UPI
N.Y. AG Letitia James sues parent company of Zelle for allowing fraud
1 of 2 | New York Attorney General Letitia James filed suit Wednesday against the parent company of Zelle, the banking transfer app. The company is partially owned by Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Capital One and Wells Fargo. File Photo (2012) by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo Aug. 13 (UPI) -- New York Attorney General Letitia James filed suit Wednesday against the parent company of Zelle, a bank transfer app, for "failing to protect its users from massive amounts of fraud," a press release said. An investigation by the Office of the Attorney General revealed that parent company Early Warning Services designed Zelle without critical safety features, allowing scammers to target users and steal more than $1 billion between 2017 and 2023, the release said. "No one should be left to fend for themselves after falling victim to a scam," James said in the statement. "I look forward to getting justice for the New Yorkers who suffered because of Zelle's security failures." EWS knew from the beginning that key features of the Zelle network made it uniquely susceptible to fraud, and yet it failed to adopt basic safeguards to address these glaring flaws or enforce any meaningful anti-fraud rules on its partner banks, the press release alleged. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau filed a similar suit in December 2024, but it was dropped after the President Donald Trump administration took power. James seeks restitution for damages for affected New Yorkers and a court order mandating that Zelle maintain anti-fraud measures. The app is partially owned by Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Capital One and Wells Fargo, and it was launched in 2017 to compete with other payment apps like Venmo or CashApp, which are not owned by banks. James alleges that those banks tasked EWS with hastily launching an electronic payment platform. In their rush to launch, EWS prioritized attracting new users through a simple registration process and quick transfers that left consumers vulnerable to scammers. James' complaint alleges: EWS and its partner banks knew for years that fraud was spreading on Zelle and failed to take meaningful action to stop it. When participating banks got complaints from Zelle users about fraud, EWS allowed banks to report that fraud to EWS long after it happened, which enabled bad actors to scam more consumers. When Zelle launched, EWS did not require banks to report scams. When EWS did get reports of fraud, it failed to promptly remove the fraudsters from the Zelle network or require banks to reimburse consumers for scams. EWS developed basic safeguards to address these issues as early as 2019, but failed to adopt them. EWS failed to meaningfully enforce even the limited anti-fraud rules that it did have in place against banks despite knowing of widespread violations of those rules. In one example James' department explained, a New York user received a call from someone impersonating a Con Edison employee saying that the consumer was delinquent on his energy bills and that his "electricity was going to be shut off that day" unless he paid Con Edison via Zelle. The fraudster identified "Coned Billing" as the name associated with the account. The consumer transferred $1,476.89 to a Zelle account named "Coned Billing," but after realizing the call was a scam, was told by their bank, JPMorgan Chase, that the bank "can't get [him] that money back."
