Bitcoin Forum

Just making this post because I have recently removed my feedback against Duckdice.io. I have not seen any valid scam accusations against them in the last year or so, so I decided it's time to remove my feedback. Noone else has to follow suit, but i think feedbacks should be reviewed from time to time and possibly removed if a site has been conducting business in a fair manner. Site's make mistakes and hopefully learn from them.

I also recently removed my feedback on fortunejack as well, so I encourage other users who may have tagged sites to review your feedback and let's try to keep bitcoin businesses around vs trying to kill them all.

Duckdice main profile (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=917361) Here is a link to their admin account, you guys can have a look at past accusations and make your own decision based on your tags.

If there are legitimate recent scam claims against this site, could someone please link them here.

I recently changed my neg to neutral with FJ.  It's been 4 years and they seem to have changed their ways. Hopefully they don't regress.

I'm not a DT member but I think thisbis the right way of doing things especially if the user/service have remain clean for a long time. Making the feedback permanent towards gambling sites like this should always be taken into consideration, they aren't like fake ICO projects where you can put the feedback permanently.


How about completely removing the feedback? I know that feedbacks are unmoderated and is always in the discretion of the user to remove it but as a carrier of feedback even if it is neutral it still has an effect towards its reputation, not unless you entirely change your comment in that neutral feedback it will still send the same message about the user.

The feedback is accurate.  Neutral feed back does not affect the users Trust score.

If I have remember correctly I had removed feedback from their main account (if I ever left) after this accusation (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5213238.0) when they launched new casino towerbet (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5220588.0). Also had left negative for towerbet as well, but when someone point out about their solved accusation then I turned my negative to neutral. I believe if they solved accusation then we should give them chances. Just not like ruin their reputation with permanent tag.

If they started out with shady activity and were tagged, but start operating properly for a period of time, then of course we should revisit our feedbacks. If they continue to operate shady, then the tag should stay permanent.

If we are allowed to interfere in this chat:)
The negative feedback was placed in Summer 2017, now it is nearly spring 2020, so we would be very grateful to all if you can reevaluate your review.

I think yahoo62278 is correct, Duckdice wants to conduct their business in the forum since there's a huge audience here but how can they attract audience if their profile is full of negative. Gambling sites can make mistakes but what matters if they learn from it and they are going at the right path, do understand that Duckdice also contributed to the forum in terms of revenue and most of the members who tagged Duckdice has been enjoying the perks of being a reputable member in the forum.

The last time I remember they try to run a signature campaign but was not successful since there is no participants that would like to work with them as they are afraid they might get red tag of promoting a scam site.

DT members has to ensure they are fair, carefully evaluate who's running the business here and think of everyone's benefit and not on personal wants.

2 and half years of suffering on this forum from the negative trust taught us a very good lesson.

Does anyone knows about formal procedure for feedback removal or re-evaluation request ?

It all depends on an individual who sent the feedback to you. Maybe you could PM them to look into this thread if they have not and possibly tell them why you feel the feedback should be reviewed but the feedback left by Zepher is not possible to remove at the moment as he passed away.

Create a thread on reputation with the details why do you think the feedback should be removed and PM each of the member with the link of this thread. If you can prove that you aren't guilty of what you are accused, they will considet removing the tag. Although, Zepher tag can't be removed, if DT member comes to a conclusion that you don't deserve negative feedback, someone may counter the negative with a positive feedback.

Do you guys take the time to read a topic before posting? Just curious cause if ya did you'd likely see duckdice feedback showing a -1. Then if you dug just a little deeper you'd see that -1 was from Zepher. Then in conclusion you would see that JeromeTash answered the reason that tag would not be taken off. Hence rendering your replies useless.

Maybe folks above haven't looked into issue deeper, but there isn't just Zepher feedback left on Duckdice profile - it shows -2 at least for me. I don't have custom trust list, so feedback left by Lutpin is shown as Trusted.

I think Duckdice.io can soon start their signature campaign? I know they are planning to relaunch it before but they failed, since we have Betcoin.ag that just launched recently, maybe they can also start again, and I guess if it's manage by yahoo62278, reputable member, then we can assure that concerns will be relayed to the team immediately.

I don't have Lutpin excluded and when I look at their feedback it shows Lutpin not even in DT, that would make me assume you have Lutpin in your trusted list.

*EDIT*

Checked your trust list and you're correct. You have no trust list.

Lutpin isn't in my trust list but I'm sure someone from my trust list have Lutpin included. However, I have checked with dt filter and I can see Lutpin negative feerback in dt mode too.
This- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=917361;dt

Luptin is in DT2 now with 7 strength, you can check it on BPIP (https://bpip.org/Profile?p=Lutpin)

https://i.ibb.co/bzpgmsf/Screenshot-72.png (https://imgbb.com/)

Agree with this one, launch signature campaign and managed from reputable CM will gain trust for his casino.

3 feedbacks are visible to me. Zepher, Lutpin and Lauda also. Even if Lauda is not on my trust list, someone from my trust list has it in his list. All of them are DT2 so that they all have a certain weight.


If you say, they can run signature and improve his rating, it sounds that through a signature campaign he can buy a positive rating here. I think that's the wrong guideline, I know some services which did not help SC no matter how generous they were.

Personally, I don't think it's easy to remove red tags here. Zepher for obvious reasons, but Lutpin and Lauda the question is how willing they are to reconsider the situation and potentially to remove negative feedback.
it can be covered with positive feedbacks, earned or as a counter. So, it is necessary by Duckdice.io to make an effort a get some positive feedback.

---

@yahoo62278 I'm not sure you know about this extension with DT1/DT2/INACTIVE/BANNED badges [BETA] BPIP Extension - user info add-on / extension for Firefox, Chrome, et al (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5224821)
great thing.

If that was possible, may be every scam projects would including 1xbet run signature campaign and wash their bad reputations. May be this is the reason why marlboroza had suggested 1xbet to run a signature campaign  :D

Actually, as I think, a signature campaign is not for only removing negative feedback. If so then all the (Red trusted) companies do it. First, do a Scam, then run a signature campaign all problem solved? No, it is not. So You have to prove that you are legit now and all the previous problems were solved. Suppose follow on betnomy  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5239211.0).They had some negative feedback from the beginning, Later they do some effort to prove them legit. But they have still 1-2 neg feedback but they earned some positive feedback too. (Maybe yahoo know more than us about betnomy, so better to ask him and start your journey to prove you are legit now)
You can also notice bestchange (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1073450) efforts to remove their negative feedbacks.

My suggestions:

1. Create a thread and ask bitcointalk users to post anything wrong about duckdice. so that you can solve the issues. ( you can also launch a review campaign)
2. Solve all the issues, and refer them (who gave you red trust) to the thread to see recent review about duckdice. Also you can request them to review their feedback. (but don't ask them to give you a positive feedback instead of negative one :))
3. Start marketing in bitcointalk with your full power.

I hope in this way you could be helped you to prove you are legit and also Any DT members can counter the previous neg feedbacks If you can prove you legit. Good Luck

I do not want to bid on who suggested what and with which intention, just saying that high paying signature campaign can't remove negative rating if it's based on a real accusation. I remember p2pb2b exchange which promises his investment in the forum through a signature campaign with the expectation to wash his reputation. in fact, they would run the campaign with money they took from deceived users.

Just saying Duckdice.io or any other neg. rated service can start with improving his rating through correcting mistakes and showing us that they are doing business with good intentions. Say "sorry" or "we removed all Ponzi" is not enough to be trusted.
If we can see there positive move, the rating can be improved even if previous red tags still exist.

No, that's not the right way. It all looks like an attempt to buy trust using a signature campaign which is something untrustworthy itself on the community's side while also looking like a stupid ransom from duckdice's position (Launch a signature campaign or the feedback won't be removed). The problem here is different members react differently to removing the negative feedback they have already left on a profile.

signature campaigns should never be used as a tool to remove negative trust but rather as a way of marketing and expanding a service's reach to new customers.

---

Bestchange were never scammers. Some negative-trust-happy people just rained red tags on them without even thinking twice. I felt bad for them and i believe if it was some other service, they would have given up in the very first week. I don't think they fit as an example here.

Maybe it was sarcasm.

I dunno but Lauda had this topic [Cult of Lauda] An historic peace: Rome’s treaty with Carthage  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5224240.0) and I believe that if Lauda see good things and changes from Duckdice.io, neg feedback can be removed.

The issue is Lauda is less active recent months.