What I mean is that by presenting a story of a trap with apparent evidence, you are obviously being prompted to look at that evidence and trap - which inherently means you aren't likely to question if the trap is reversed with you as a cog within the trap..
Social engineering relies on deception like this entirely and I find that others are saying that the language being used in the conversation is not reflective of a professional in the industry to be a flag to highlight such a possibility.
I don't know either way - but yes, I am just saying to bare it in mind as a possibility.
I have things I cannot disclose. Those guys are flexing ego.