Bitcoin Forum

Account being accused:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=33070

I have strong reason to believe this account was sold, it has not made posts in over a year and returned a week ago to launch a new dice site which happens to have the 100% exact new planned design of luckynumber.me a site which was proven to engage in fraudulent activity*  If a mod were to check this account I guarantee a brand new email was attached to it this week.

*source:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=621659.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582687.0


The investment site's thread
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=809026.msg9064177#msg9064177

I'm guessing my post on that thread will be deleted as it is self-moderated. Note, he immediately deleted my post noting my suspicions a few minutes later.


I left negative trust on the account "zeeshanblc" after I noticed he was farming up trust to post the next luckynumber investment dice site launch. Shortly after that this new account RandyFolds seems to have been purchased to promote the new website as zeeshan was no longer viable.  



Don't invest funds in onedice, I strongly believe they will play against the house and scam them. I've never accused someone of scamming who was not later proven to be a scammer.




And here's even more evidence for people who don't trust my word. I'm 100% certain that this is luckynumber. I will not let someone who wronged me in the past get away with repeated fraud and I will continue to be on a constant lookout for his next account which will inevitably come.

Whois Information


ONEDICE.ME WHOIS
Domain ID:D13336627-ME
Domain Name:ONEDICE.ME
Domain Create Date:31-Aug-2014 19:36:48 UTC
Domain Last Updated Date:04-Sep-2014 09:03:38 UTC
Domain Expiration Date:31-Aug-2015 19:36:48 UTC
Last Transferred Date:
Sponsoring Registrar:Tucows Inc. R99-ME (69)
Created by:Tucows Inc. R99-ME (69)
Last Updated by Registrar:Tucows Inc. R99-ME (69)
Domain Status:TRANSFER PROHIBITED


Luckynumber.me (proven fraud)  WHOIS
Domain ID:D11397696-ME
Domain Name:LUCKYNUMBER.ME
Domain Create Date:17-Feb-2014 17:10:46 UTC
Domain Last Updated Date:18-Apr-2014 20:50:09 UTC
Domain Expiration Date:17-Feb-2015 17:10:46 UTC
Last Transferred Date:
Sponsoring Registrar:Tucows Inc. R99-ME (69)
Created by:Tucows Inc. R99-ME (69)
Last Updated by Registrar:Afilias R54-ME (700001)
Domain Status:OK



More evidence:

Check the meta tags on both onedice and lucky number..

<meta name="title" content="LuckyNumber - Bitcoin Gambling Casino - Bitcoin Faucet - Provably Fair" />
<meta name="description" content="LuckyNumber is provably fair Bitcoin dice game and bitcoin casino. We offer the lowest house edge, chat, instant payouts, autobetting bot, and a bitcoin faucet." />
<meta name="keywords" content="bitcoin dice, bitcoin gambling, bitcoin casino, bitcoin faucet, BTC faucet, BTC casino, BTC gambling" />

<meta name="title" content="OneDice - Best bitcoin casino | bitcoin dice | bitcoin gambling | Invest"/>
<meta name="description" content="OneDice is provably fair Bitcoin dice game and Bitcoin casino. We offer provably fair BTC gambling, instant payouts, auto betting, invest option, free BTC faucet and chat."/>
<meta name="keywords" content="bitcoin dice, bitcoin gambling, bitcoin casino, bitcoin faucet, BTC faucet, BTC casino, BTC gambling, be the bank, invest BTC, invest bitcoin"/>

It's a copy paste from the previous sites for the meta/seo stuff.

pics: http://puu.sh/bXrl0/a57966e135.png / http://puu.sh/bXrlY/e3d38aae5e.png

This is just not right, calling someone scammer and that site is a scam based on your assumptions. To me that site is not scam until they do something wrong.

As for that account:
- if it was sold, so what, there is a good reason people start this way instead from 0 with newbie accounts, this doesn't mean anything
- account not being active for a year doesn't mean anything, I don't write here so much as I used as well.


Self moderated thread, I wonder what you wrote. I doubt it was nice and on topic since he deleted it.

Interesting accusation. I'm going to get the onedice.me peeps over here for an explanation.

Also, I'm not sure if account selling is still allowed on this forum but it has been proven to almost exclusively been used for fraud purposes or to spam for signature campaign money. Theymos needs to come out and condemn it if this is still the case which I believe it is.

Account selling is still allowed and banning it would be futile. Disallowing it would just push the sale of accounts even further underground and probably make it even easier for them to scam with their accounts. Whether account selling is banned or not it will still happen just like scams and scammers so people just need to be extra vigilant and on the lookout for suspicious activity like you are doing now.

I was searching for info on Onedice before I try playing there, and I arrived here.

Having read what you said about "RandyFolds", I spent little bit of time reading his posts. His writing style has changed (for the better actually). Can't say for sure that the account was bought. We can't proof it, but highly likely. Really grateful for the tip, Stunna!

I have alternative contact with the real randyfolds. I will ask him about this and see what he says. If you are in fact correct I will remove my feedback and have him provide me or you with whatever information he has on the person who bought it.

Strong language.

Perhaps discourage.

Agreed. As soon as it's disallowed, people's guard will go down. Their diligence when doing any type of trades will probably go down assuming the account owner is original.

Not sure if Stunna was already aware of this info but it looks to be confirmed that it is infact a sold account:

The account has positive/green trust. It is assumed that people with "green" trust can be trusted with large amounts of money. This is very different then buying an account to get a higher payout from a signature campaign as it easily allows someone to scam for a potentially large amount of money.

As hilariousandco correctly quoted me as saying the previous owner of this account did try to sell his account for 1 BTC which is much higher then the market value of a "normal" senior account with his activity level, therefore I would conclude that he was trying to get someone to buy it for the "green" trust.

This is only going to create a false sense of security. It should be more public that account selling is allowed so people know to exercise caution.

I do not like the fact that the account was apparently sold because of the fact that it has positive trust. IMO this is an abuse of the trust system

All's well as long as the positive trust is removed.

Thanks for the update. Pretty safe to say this is a case closed. Keep eyes peeled for their next account/investment site iteration. Investment dice sites are never provably fair for investors, don't waste your money investing on them.

i cant withdraw the fund , Thanks stuna for Warning Dont invest in the site it is SCAM.

I PMed you prior to leaving them negative trust in hopes you'd get paid. Perhaps they will refill the wallet and pay you though depending on the amount.

If not I'll send you any info I have on them.

Completely off-topic but did you watch Wicked?

You left this feedback:


on someone.

In Wicked, Alphaba sings, "No good deed goes unpunished!" Coincidence?

Looks like RandyFolds is a hacked account, and the hacker was trying to sell it. Tecshare, do you have any further info?

You got your funds so you should correct your statement and you should not be a part of angry stunna mob.

Some withdrawals are processed manually and some are not, all you should have done is wait few hours

No this is not hacked account if you really want to know.

Ok, remove the positive trust I'm fine with that, but giving me negative trust based on BS is just trust system abuse. Calling me or the site scam while i never scammed or intended to scam anyone is just shitty act.

Some investors are pissed about your move so you know.

I will not discuss anything with stunna as he made his conclusions and decisions already. People on this forum should use their own brains and not blindly listen what few people say here, especially when they run competitor site's.

Why do you think that your opinion has any more influence than anyone else and that you can just call theymos out like that?
You're the king of assumptions, and this thread especially the domain registrars proved nothing. No valid evidence in this thread what so ever

He tried to get me to buy his account also, and I asked him to make at least one post (as it had not posted in ~1 year) to get the attention of the true owner if it in fact was hacked, and he refused to do so (he actually ignored my request, which I would consider a refusal). I also asked him if he can sign a message from an old unedited post with a BTC address and his response was

So what you are saying, that he did not have access to that account and yet after he started a dice site with it? Doesn't make any sense.

I see you are one of those account traders, I bet you don't reveal your sold accounts once sold. I wonder how would someone react after paying you 4BTC for that Hero account on default trust list you have for sale and then having everyone calling him a scammer because he bought that account.

I am saying that he did not want to attract attention to the account by posting with it. If the account was hacked several months ago the new owner could have made a new account when he was unable to access his old account. If the old owner saw his old account making posts they he might claim that it was hacked.

I did not purchase nor sell this account because there was a question over ownership. If you want to scam then confidentiality will not be kept. If you want to use your account for non obvious scamming purposes then there is no reason for me to disclose that an account was sold.

1. Your website claims to be "provably fair" for investors, this is a blatant lie.

2. There is a mountain of evidence that you are giftcoins / luckynumber / zeeshanblc . You could actually start viewing some of the evidence and try to refute it instead of claiming it is all one giant coincidence.

3. It's extremely pathetic that you purchased a default trust account just to leave me negative feedback in retaliation. Supposedly the same account claims to have invested 300 coins on the site.


All bitcoin dice investment schemes could very well be scams, but in this situation I'm 100% certain that yours is.

If you have not been hacked please contact me and I will verify for everyone here. If you are really the original account owner you know how to do this outside of the forum.

Just thought I'd offer another opinion on this site after seeing it launch..

For those who don't know, there's an older casino/dice site running under the name 'LuckyNumber' which was proven by another user to not be provably fair (link to this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582687.msg6962629#msg6962629)).
The casino's "provably fair" method was created in such a way that ANY bet at ANY time could be manipulated and force a loss to the user, regardless if he chose a client seed / different bet chance.

After I saw this, I thought that luckynumber might be using this to pull extra funds by manipulating bets, so I did a little research into the site and found that giftcoins (the 'administrator') and zeeshanblc (a 'player') where the same person. The link for this information can be found here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=582687.msg6962629#msg6962629).

What they were doing was creating a large number of fake bets, raising the volume of their site to make it look active and to make it look like players were winning lots of coins off the site. However all these alternative accounts were linked directly to the address linked on zeeshanblc's account.


How does this relate to onedice?

Looking at the first post in this thread, there are a few things that show that luckynumber and onedice are the same site.

• Both domains registered by the same registrar (Tucows)
• Both websites share very similar meta descriptions and meta keywords

I've gone and taken a look at the two sites myself to make a comparison and see what else they share in common!

• Imgur album (http://imgur.com/a/b2YJb) with a few pic comparisons
• Site structure is the same, ie js files stored under /assets/front/js/file.js
• Both sites spell loses as 'looses' (css class)

Furthermore the style of writing by RandyFolds is pretty close to giftcoins, it's a sort of broken English thing.

I posted in the self-moderated thread, but in case it gets deleted I'll post here too:

Can you post the TXIDs of when you sent money to "invest" (and hopefully the TXID of when you withdrew your profits)? There is a scam accusation that someone purchased a default trust account to backup the purchased account with positive trust. This person is claiming to have invested 360 BTC in the site and if your bitcoin moved to what could be their cold storage then this could be disproved.

No, I can't, because why on earth would anyone send any money to this site? I certainly didn't.

I see now that it says on their website that .1 BTC for one share or .001% ownership.

Your post semi implied that you sent .1 to test the investment feature.

Another flaw in the investment feature is that the bankroll will go up and down.  Say for example the bankroll was 10k BTC now and someone invests 1k BTC making the bankroll now 11k BTC, this would mean that you should need .11 BTC to purchase .001% ownership. By offering the price of one share at a static price, they are essentially shorting investors who put money in when the bankroll was smaller.

I certainly didn't mean to imply that. I just read the site and posted based on what I read.


Since each 0.1 BTC share buys one 100 thousandth of the profit, they can't sell more than 100 thousand shares without them having to pay out more than 100% of their profits to investors. (I guess since they charge 10% commission on that they could in fact sell 111,111 shares, pay out 111% of their profit and take 11% back in commission, leaving them with 0). So the bankroll can't really get any bigger than 10k (or 11.111k) BTC.

By selling the shares as if the bankroll was already 10k, they're shorting everyone who invests when the bankroll is actually smaller than that.

At least they've put some thought into this scam - the fake provable fairness is one step more evolved from using the current time (like luckybit did), the investment scam isn't immediately obvious, etc.

I think they saw how successful that DB was in getting people to quickly invest in their bankroll to crazy amounts. They appear to have invested a good amount of money into this scam, buying both the RandyFields account and the chalidore (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=120227) account in order to give credibility to the scam. I would guesstimate that they spent at least 3-4 BTC buying the two accounts plus some additional small amounts for hosing and the domain plus some additional amount for sock puppet accounts

RandyFolds (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=33070) sent me this PM in response to the negative Trust rating I left him:


Bold parts added by me for emphasis. Why is RandyFolds so focused on account selling/purchasing being within forum rules when the real issue is whether RandyFolds is the real RandyFolds? Well, I guess I kind of answered my own question.

I would suggest editing your negative trust to say that the account appears to have been purchased with positive trust in order to give the apparance of being trustworthy and tried to run a scam.

I don't think there is any problem with buying a senior account to conduct business with (although this is very risky) as long as the account has zero trade history so any counter-party should know it is appropriate to approach any transaction with skepticism and to take the appropriate precautions.  What happened in this case is the account was purchased with the intent of getting counter-parties to use less skepticism.

Also it appears that chalidore has been taken off default trust

Good idea. I'll do that now.

I have received no contact from RandyFolds. I am assuming at this point either he sold the account or it was hacked.

Most probably it's sold accout, I saw some thread on Digital goods section that someone want to buy positive trust account and want to pay good money for that.

It took a few days but eventually they got around to deleting it:

https://i.imgur.com/VfYLm1V.png

It also appears that the main self-moderated thread is locked now.

Why are you surprised? I don't need any more trashing on this forum, I think this was more then enough. You can continue here as much as you like but not on the thread that was created by me with good intensions.

Also about your view of things how investors would get less paid in case site is in profit...why you did not give example if site goes into negative as well, then they would loose lot less then on sites like JD was.

Any of this doesn't make any sense any more, I'll not waste my time here in this forum owned by a few. There are other ways of advertising then this forum.

I'm not surprised. I didn't say I was surprised. Your activity is consistent with that of a scammer.

Whenever anyone accused JD of scamming I would argue with them and show them how they were wrong. I wouldn't deleted their post and lock the thread. That's a sign of weakness.

I didn't even accuse you of scamming. I put forward some reasonable doubts I have about your site. You chose not to address them but to delete them. Why would you do that if you were capable of answering them in a manner to reassure people that there's nothing to worry about?


It wasn't "trashing". I was pointing out problems with your site. If they aren't problems, tell us why. If they are, tell us how you're going to fix them. Don't pretend I never raised them by silencing me.


If you don't invest at all you lose even less when the site loses. What's your point?

The model you're using dilutes everyone's investment massively so both their wins and their losses are greatly reduced. Meanwhile you're left holding lots of their coins.


I would recommend advertising somewhere where rational minded people aren't able to point out all the flaws in your site if you don't intend to address them.

I'll be leaving negative trust on your account in an attempt to warn potential victims of your site.

What happened to chalidore? Dude just up and went dark.

 I wonder  ::)

codegnome likely paid 2.5 BTC for it on or around September 10th because it was on default trust. Around ~a week ago it was removed from default trust, making his "investment" now near worthless. Since his account no longer serves the purpose it was purchased for it was abandoned.

hehe... my post didn't get deleted yet. If it does, I'll be sure to post again here. It got locked, so it's going to stay there for awhile.

At this point there is not much of a reason to delete the negative comments about his site on his thread. Someone could easily search his site name and easily come to the conclusion he is scamming

I have been observing the site the past couple of days. They just have bots continuously betting, to make it seem active, and have people fall into the provable fair trap, which they can manipulate, by putting in bets in between, to rig the provably fair part. The site should be shutdown.