Bitcoin Forum

Today I resigned from the dadice.com signature campaign and left negative ratings on all known dadice accounts.

I would like to use this thread to explain my reasons behind this. There is a full copy of their thread linked below if you want to read everything in detail.

#1 NLNico asked for a cold storrage address to be made public in order to verify the bankroll.
screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/VCoewnP.png

#2 They declined because crowd funding is below 10% of the site
screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/FpWzbHl.png

#3 After this was not accepted as a reason, they stated "others dont do it either"
screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/Dgxi0Qx.png

#4 After they have been presented with a list of examples of others that show their cold storrage address, they stated they have a large secret investor that prohibits this for privacy concerns.
screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/FTDDH0o.png

#5 After they have been made aware that this makes them look shady and might hurt their business, they stated that its a risk they are willing to take.
screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/OKUReNF.png

#6 A quick summary of arguments by NLNico.
screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/EekzAxc.png

#7 The privacy issue is not a valid point (as was nicely explained by NLNico) due to the fact that the majority of the bankroll is provided by the dadice team themselves and could thus be presented.
screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/iIwNVU4.png

#8 They answer: we dont do it, period.
screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/eE2puVY.png

#9 Stunna offers to vouch for them.
screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/Md27P5z.png

#10 They still refuse to provide anything and instead disable investments.
screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/jX9zBiY.png

There is also plenty of drama regarding this, I tried to keep this out of this post as much as possible.

Every reasonable argument has been stubbornly waved aside by the dadice team. Many of the arguments given have been used by other services that turned bad in the past. I obviously can not predict the future and have no way of knowing whether they will run with your funds or not, providing a cold storrage address will also not prevent this sort of events[1], but I do not recommend playing or investing there. They show all warning signs of a scam.


dadice_dev (BCT ID 512841)
link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=512841

Da_Dice_Staff (BCT ID 464340)
link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=464340

dadice (BCT ID 444316)
link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=444316

dadice_pr (BCT ID 538753)
link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=538753
as mentioned by Quickseller here -> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1066980.msg11991333#msg11991333

dadice thread full archive up until post #1623 https://archive.is/QvvpM


[1] Edit: 2015.07.28 - thanks ndnhc

From what I can tell, these complaints add up to this:

Someone wants proof about bankroll, dadice decides not to provide proof.

Is there really anything more to it than that?

I can see why they wouldn't feel good about revealing their resources to Stunna (their biggest competitor, right?).

EDIT: I also want to stay away from any drama.  I'm not an investor in the site but at the moment I'm not seeing the sketchy part of this and I'm wondering if competitors of dadice are merely stirring up FUD to hurt their business.  I dunno the facts, but I'm curious about the motivations of the parties involved.

Wouldn't be the first time a dice site has gone rogue. Anyone remember the previous two?

Sucks for whoever still plays dice. What options are left now that primedice doesn't accept US players and most are to lazy to use a proxy, vpn or tor or just don't feel safe using them. Time to start converting to clam for just-dice? Would be nice for those already invested or planning on investing in clam  ;)

Shocked how big dadice has gotten when the previous dice sites pretty much did the same exact thing. Not saying they plan on running with funds or anything like that but if they do, those who have seen what happened to the previous two dice sites should have known better and can't blame anyone but themselves.

Im willing to remove the ratings if a trusted, neutral party (e.g. devthedev, tomatocage, DannyHamilton) has verified the bankroll.

Its not only the fact that they do not make the existence of funds public, but also the attitude towards IMHO valid criticism. They come up with new reasons for every one that is refuted. I have seen this highly defensive behaviour in the past and I cant say that any good came out of it.


You are probably refering to dice.ninja and dicebitco.in.


You are welcome to.


Yes I checked that, the address was funded by their deposit addresses. ~600 different ones IIRC. Which is a reasonable amount of players for a new dice site.


The way they handle this is the reason I am not an investor currently.


It is claimed that they have 500 BTC, it is not "well known".



I am not forcing anyone either. It is however important to makeing an educated choice to see different opinions on a matter. If you are only ever confronted with a single perspective how is your decision to follow it an educated one?


I like how you just copied this even though it is not applicable here.


Sure if no one cares about you, no one will criticise you.

i agree, with accusations as big as this, i would steer far away from this drama and just watch how it unfolds. I understand how they wouldnt want to reveal their bankrol lthe stunna, but he is a very trusted and well established member of the community; his vouch wouldve cleared any suspicions of the site.

Didnt see your edit. I see the sketchy part. I have been blind in the past. I just cant stand on the sidelines and let this unfold any longer. I dont like drama either and will do my best to avoid it, but I also feel I have to make sure the warning signs are seen.

IMO All dice sites are going to die in the end, one way or the other.  Perhaps they just didn't want to post it, or maybe they have something to hide.  Either way, I've PMed them and let's see how they respond.

Those are the two sites.

Don't play dice myself but know several people who do and they haven't had any problems at dadice and were able to withdrawal 1+ BTC several times. All I'm saying is anyone who is keeping BTC at the site or planning to invest should be suspicious, especially when dadice is growing fast just like the two sites mentioned above did.

Notice how everyone trying to minimize this situation has a DaDice signature. ::)

Unfortunately for DaDice, sig jockeys aren't a stand-in PR team.

Any gambling site should be willing to show proof of solvency, at the very least to a neutral party for verification.

Any gambling site that says, on the site, "90% of the coins are held in one cold storage address which will be displayed to our members, thereby allowing for full transparency to all of DaDice members." better be displaying that cold storage address to it's members.

Any excuses as to why they aren't doing something that they should be doing, and something that they've promised to do, can't be taken in any way other than they are trying to hide something.

Yes, it appears that all TX's into that address are from the DaDice Hot Wallet (https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/DaDice.com).


Looking through the transaction history of 1HMAgvunJzr3HoRAUFg3VuU2UJm9KWDjFu there is a few transactions of interest. There is txid  5359858afea90c2628e83aa540e4c8c407307c73dd5e12776627a627e93afc14 (https://www.walletexplorer.com/txid/5359858afea90c2628e83aa540e4c8c407307c73dd5e12776627a627e93afc14) that had sent ~28 BTC to 1HMAgvunJzr3HoRAUFg3VuU2UJm9KWDjFu then the following transaction, txid  3743839633b8500ab67ddde191ae2cb4d8578ae62f9a95153ab9ef9d6d8dc811 (http://walletexplorer.com/txid/3743839633b8500ab67ddde191ae2cb4d8578ae62f9a95153ab9ef9d6d8dc811) sent ~18 BTC to  13T1eoJTe9mCMdNpYaCE26DNKqPjxNZrqu (https://www.walletexplorer.com/address/13T1eoJTe9mCMdNpYaCE26DNKqPjxNZrqu) which is a known Bitfinex address (https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/Bitfinex.com).

Previously, txid  8d141b3a68b662ee0b9eda5aa473394fd4164645b699acdc656238c4d8022f91 (http://walletexplorer.com/txid/8d141b3a68b662ee0b9eda5aa473394fd4164645b699acdc656238c4d8022f91) sent ~ 2 BTC to the same address as above after receiving 2 BTC from the DaDice Hot Wallet (their deposit addresses).

Prior to that, txid 2f3890a7a01cac24103187215f9604f8360ccbbbf05c2c987d57ba1aa53b056c (http://walletexplorer.com/txid/2f3890a7a01cac24103187215f9604f8360ccbbbf05c2c987d57ba1aa53b056c) was sent from their deposit addresses to 1HMAg... then the following tx (txid e69e9c02b1f5af48c2fd52d73b1edb28c80ed629e896b0afda8f7db42bef48ed (http://walletexplorer.com/txid/e69e9c02b1f5af48c2fd52d73b1edb28c80ed629e896b0afda8f7db42bef48ed)) sent 10 BTC to  157sSisTvWJyGKEzGrsPjr85rcvaRx9gei (https://www.walletexplorer.com/address/157sSisTvWJyGKEzGrsPjr85rcvaRx9gei) which is a known LBC (https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/LocalBitcoins.com) address.

Prior to that txid  eda31938a18195c80bc910a279dc4fd5547f65a69f49bc5209b99f0accd403aa (https://www.walletexplorer.com/txid/eda31938a18195c80bc910a279dc4fd5547f65a69f49bc5209b99f0accd403aa) sent 2 BTC to the 1HMAg.... address and the following transaction sent 1.4 BTC to  1Hhpf847U3xvpx66dYhrJTZmAWL6hSuGJa (https://www.walletexplorer.com/address/1Hhpf847U3xvpx66dYhrJTZmAWL6hSuGJa) which on the following transaction (txid  6d94eb1b1fecf8b1d5e6577e987f19a39434206932674105a7752d5f11841f63 (https://www.walletexplorer.com/txid/6d94eb1b1fecf8b1d5e6577e987f19a39434206932674105a7752d5f11841f63)) to  1E3yepRj7A2WwSE3yghS8bQPrVPWGXfEWj (https://www.walletexplorer.com/address/1E3yepRj7A2WwSE3yghS8bQPrVPWGXfEWj) which is a known Agora Market (https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/AgoraMarket) address (a Dark Net Market).

The vast majority of the remainder of the transactions out of the 1HMAg.... address are for dust amounts (under .01).

I would also question how exactly their large investors ever got their money to them in the first place. In theory their investors would deposit into their deposit address, that address would be spend-linked to the rest of their deposit addresses and then it would be moved to cold storage. However this is clearly not the case. There are no large amounts going into or out of the two known DaDice wallets (mentioned above) of any meaningful magnitude.

Stunna may actually have more information about this situation then he realizes. Looking at the transaction history of  13T1eoJTe9mCMdNpYaCE26DNKqPjxNZrqu (https://www.walletexplorer.com/address/13T1eoJTe9mCMdNpYaCE26DNKqPjxNZrqu), it looks like txid 57e0fa2b8b48c7b50eb69d5b313a4b51671eb68813a5709a9158999d6206ec0a (https://www.walletexplorer.com/txid/57e0fa2b8b48c7b50eb69d5b313a4b51671eb68813a5709a9158999d6206ec0a) had inputs from a PD address (actually several addresses) and a single output to 13T1eoJTe9mCMdNpYaCE26DNKqPjxNZrqu which is the address that several transactions were sent from the DaDice Hot Wallet (not their customer deposit address wallet). He may be able to give the username who withdrew funds via that txid as well as their betting history (did they actually play a significant amount of bets or did they deposit 18+ BTC simply to "wash" their funds).

that is quite possible, many people often use dice sites as a bitcoin tumbler.

That's pretty much it, except that it is standard practice for sites holding investments to publish proof of solvency. They often don't do it without being asked, but once asked it's weird for them to refuse. DaDice has refused, which makes people think they have something to hide.

They already have "revealed" their resources, they just didn't prove that their revelation is true. That's what people are asking for here.

As for motivations I'm sure there's a certain amount of wanting to damage the competition, as well as "we had to do it so why shouldn't they?", but for the most part I think people want to hold them to the same level of transparency as the other sites offer.

For me personally these are really the things I did:


With the verifier and vulnerability I obviously even helped them. And I was planning to even promote them in the future (for free, like all sites on my site.)

I have no intention at all of spreading FUD, I just wanted to see proof of solvency. A simple and standard thing to do.

For my personal benefit it would have been best to ignore the lack of solvency proof and add them to my site, since they have a big paying "referral promo" going on that could easily earn me 1 bitcoin. The #1 in that promo currently has 0.005 commission which would win 1 bitcoin - my site can seriously generate more than that by just listing the site. Since my site is not based on decisions that make me money at all, I chose to ask for the cold wallet instead (and explained why it was important.) After all the bad excuses, it's clear they don't have the claimed bankroll. This hurts them so much - while an hour of their time could easily prove their solvency. There is absolutely no reason why they shouldn't do it, except for the obvious one: they don't have the coins.

The thing is that, what do they lose by showing it? Nothing right? Wich makes people believe they are lying, even more after they tried to use silly excuses presented by shorena. Honestly if they just said no we dont to show it, it woul have been more credible

With bitcoin it is so easy to prove solvency.. Although I can understand they won't prove it to every user requesting it, doing it every month or couple of months should be possible right?

or they can just post the address in their website but due for some weird circumstances they can't even show it. So, Its better for whales not to play in the site maybe they can't afford to pay they up if they were to win like around 100-200BTC

They cant just post an address without signing it. Everybody can claim i own that i own this but cannot prove

The only end to these scams and discussions will be Primedice accepting investments, or Just dice reopening investments. Till then investors should dodge or avoid every single dice site for investments. Creating a dice site doesn't seem to be a much hard to do task for programmers, and a lot of them can just end as scams.

Many are talking as if Da Dice is a scam. Find me a single scam accusation, lol. :P

How are you even comparing? :P


Edit: People are unaware of the facts. There is no withdrawal that did not get honored. Nor are there any complaints regarding loss of funds, or anything related.
This is pure speculation. Da Dice hasn't yet provided a Proof of Solvency. But, that doesn't make it a scam...

A competitor just made random hits, and he got lucky at one..

Ideally we prevent a scam, instead of just closing our eyes and let the scam with many losses happen :/



Withdrawals have nothing to do with solvency. MtGox was doing withdrawals for long time while not being solvent.

Proof of solvency is a standard practice for dice sites that accept investments. After all the bad excuses, it's clear they don't have the claimed bankroll. This hurts them so much - while an hour of their time could easily prove their solvency. There is absolutely no reason why they shouldn't do it, except for the obvious one: they don't have the coins.

Is it bad if they don't have the claimed bankroll? Yes, and that definitely makes them a scam in the making. So the accusations and warnings are 100% correct. The only time dice site didn't prove solvency was dice.ninja just days before they stole the 2k btc bankroll. Ideally we don't let that happen again, don't you think? I like to repeat how easy it is for them to prove us all wrong.

AFAIK I am the one who mostly started to ask questions and I am not a competitor at all, nor do I make random hits. The only time I was involved in a "scam accusation discussion" like this was BTC-Arbs (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=474787.msg5515720#msg5515720) months before they scammed hundreds of coins.

I understand the pages of the discussion is a long read, but please do read it a bit before defending a scam in the making. Especially considering you should have some moral conflict operating their signature campaign. I do -not- mean this personally or as attack to you, I am 100% serious that you should have a proper -objective- look at the situation.

Did you know , A ponzi is not a scam unless it defaults on the payouts ? All the while it runs, its just like this claiming to have money, but shows no proof of it.

Thanks to bitcoin , we can have that proof, and not showing it, just means one thing. The big investor excuse is stupid isn't it ? And now that trusted people are ready to verify solvency, refusing that means you know what.

A ponzi will always end up as a scam if it claims that it will keep on paying indefinitely since at some point it WILL stop paying.

Then you cannot trust any site whatsoever. A ponzi is a scam from the beginning. They either lie about their earning rates or tell you it is a ponzi in the first place.
If you apply the same principles, you cannot trust any outsider except yourself..

The big investor excuse makes sense, if you really think about it.

There are always workarounds. All you need is a proof that Da Dice has control over such amount of funds as it shows, right?


They have also spent a lot in development of their site, as well as marketing. They can't spend it unless they had it in the first place..

Yes. That is all we are asking. Since DaDice claims to have 90+% of the funds themselves, I asked -multiple times- to just show their own coins only. So the investor excuse is completely irrelevant.

Look, I don't blame you. They have been great for their players, you have been dealing always with success with them, they have been paying everyone etc etc.. so you truly believe they have those coins. I understand this from your perspective. But those watching objectively just want to see actual proof of solvency - and you seem to agree with that too.

So yeh, all we ask for is proof they have those coins and this will be all solved. But it might be surprising to you if this proof never comes. They have had so many wrong excuses that those, who have not been "blinded" by how nice the DaDice team is, are seriously doubting that they have the coins. And scam accusations based on that are completely right. All they need to do is just prove their solvency. No big deal if they have the coins.

Honestly, I don't trust any site , but its better to avoid sites which show higher chances of ending or running as a scam . Dadice is sort of doing that .

Come to think of it, if it was any other business or site, and had the coins. They know that its important to keep the customers happy for the present and the future. What they would do in the normal case would be move the largest investor's coins to another wallet, and have another cold storage wallet for the normal funds. Then they can show proof of funds, to all or at least an escrow.



This is analogous to the Ponzi scenario. Even when Ponzi operators pay out, they essentially do so from the investor funds. It could very well be the case for Dadice, that they are spending the investor funds on the other marketing budgets and could be one reason they do not want to show proof of being solvent.

Asking here since I dont get it, Dadice has closed down their investment feature . Does this still makes them a scammer since I see that their account got a red trust

Basically this is just a pure speculation because there is no proof about this yet. Not trying to defend them but I dont see any reason of marking them with red trust because they have stopped their investment feature

The red trust is because they refuse to provide proof of funds until the investment option is disabled. Im not sure what will happen next since dadice already closed the investment option

It is clear that they do not have the bankroll that they claimed to have. Lying about something so crucial definitely deserves a red big warning. It showed complete intend to scam the investors they would have gotten in the future. They might have ran with the future bankroll (like dice.ninja) or at best they would have gotten a relatively too big share of the profits. Even for players this is very bad news, since they might not be able to pay big payouts - and they might not even have all the balances of the players right now.

True, if they never had an invest option from start, no one would have really cared (although the high 20 coin max profit could be warning for some.)

However they have chosen to have this invest option at the start and by giving bad excuses for not proving their solvency, they have shown that they are not trustworthy. Changing to "no invest option" doesn't change that... in fact, it further more proves they did not have the funds they claimed they have. It seems like the only way out for not being required to prove solvency. Obviously by now it is too late, they have shown their lies about the bankroll already. And I still think actually showing that they have those coins is the only way out.

I don't know about shorena, but I know for fact that dooglus and nico are genuinely concerned about health of dice industry. Now since investment option is gone, therefore all the bankroll there is private now which renders this whole debate useless. And Da Dice has done it after public criticism (literally written in official announcement) and I know one of the reasons behind it is dooglus. On the other hand, in one of his last posts on main Da Dice thread doog has said:


so I think trust issue will now be solved too. I'm sure doog will do the right thing.

A lot of people are missing the point here. Proof of solvency should still be shown, especially now.
If you have a max payout of 20 Bitcoin players will want to know that they can trust the site to payout if they come in and win 3 max bets in a row.
Showing you have funds at least lets them see you have the funds to payout on a win.

That's the last I will write in any of these threads. Good luck.

Actually it is very strange they had a fixed max 20 coin profit too. How does that work with investors and kelly selections ? :s The max profit must be based on the invested amount and with the kelly selection the investor is selecting the max loss (= max profit for player) per bet he can have. This is how all dice invest sites work.

..

Just think how logical this fixed max payout is :)

I don't see other sites also have the proof of solvency, but why they criticize dadice, but not other sites? If shows, the scammer can also run with your funds, so it doesn't mean anything.

Dadice has a good reputation before, I don't think they will scam players in the future, and dadice

And many big exchanges including OKcoin also refused to show the proof of solvency or cold storage, but it is still the largest exchange in the world. But how about mtgox? People knew mtgox wallets before mtgox bankrupt, it was still dead, lol.

No. Every dice/gambling site that accepts investments is transparent with their cold storage.

Here you go...



OKCoin Passes Proof of Solvency Audit > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=752803.0





What other wrong excuses you got? We kinda been over all of them already..

Wow, it looks really shady, they say one statement and when showing them they are wrong they come out with other different statement, it smells bad...

i totaly agree with you.
i havent see anyone complaining about (lost funds,not recieved withdrawal or anything like that) so that what you are saying is just -.-.
if they dont want to make their bankroll public that is ok.
When AND if someone lost funds or didnt get withdrawal then you can start blaming them of scamming.
untill then i think its best to lock this thread and stop this lame talk.
regards.
-katerniko1

Yeah right what a shitty argument, with that argument all ponzies are not scam because they all pay at first rigth? Their plan was and is to build trust to be able to steal the biggest amount of money (hopefully im wrong) but thats how it looks right now

Proof of solvency can'r prove anything, scammers can also run away with funds after showing the proof, the proof is just shown to everyone, but it is not controlled by 3rd party, can't mean anything either.

The thing is that they said the had x amount of money and now they dont want to prove it, of course just because you prove you have that amount doesnt mean you will scam but not proving it its worse isnt it? They also tried to use really shitty excuses wich makes it look even more suspicious, anyways their trust is already red

So basically... they could scam? but they haven't? atm ive been very happy with my dealings at dadice.   Is the problem because they have investors people feel be more transparent? or that every dice site should be transparent about bankroll?

Well any casino could scam at any moment, thats not the thing, the thing is that they said they were in possesion of x amount of money and when asked for proof they refused, what conclusions do you get from that? Take in count they wont lose anything by showing proof.

It started because they were taking investors.  However, they've closed that program now so it would seem that everyone has had their say here already and we should probably just see what happens.  Several folks have expressed the skepticism that because they refuse to show their funds, they may not actually have them.  However, dadice has stated that he's not going to bow down and do exactly what people tell him to do just because they demand it.  I can see both sides having merit.  I also don't like being told what to do.

Dadice has been growing and working well, they aren't going to prove their bankroll.  I think that's what this all adds up to.

I have a question for OP Shorena:  if, say, dadice continues to go along with no problems, how long will you let your negative feedback stand.  You admit that your feedback is speculative, I'm just curious about how long you think it should stand if things continue to go smoothly for them.

Does shorena also in the default list? It's not good to give dadice OP neg trust because all is speculation now, no proofs show dadice is or will be scam.

Unless they have proofs can prove dadice is a scam, they can post a scam accusation thread, but not rate a red trust without evidence.

I would disagree. The numbers simply do not add up for DaDice. The amounts being wagered at DaDice are simply not enough to cover their marketing costs of at least 8 BTC per month. Take a look at the marketing costs of DaDice verses that of BitDice or even PrimeDice. Bitdice is spending less then 2 BTC per month on marketing and they have a much higher volume. Even stunna only spends around 10 to 15 BTC per month on PD marketing and he has by far the largest BTC volume of bets.

AFAIK they have not forced their investors to divest and withdraw their investments so their current investors are still at risk.

Primedice were going to spend 50 BTC per month on the next signature campaign i recall stunna saying, i dont know why they didnt do the campaign in the end but i dont believe it was due to lack of funds.

Shocking to read people accusing the dadice site which was said to be a trustworthy site before. Every gambling or dice site is definitely risky but to accuse some website without having any open scam accusation is weird. Hope this site never turns out to be a scam site and they keep paying their users as before and this speculation proves to be false. The campaign has really helped a lot of users  :)

Right, but their current investors are also grownups, right?  People can decide for themselves how to manage risk in their lives, with their money.  I think you guys are fine in having pointed out this controversy, but what more is there to say now?  As I said above, it all adds up to the fact that some people want them to prove their bankroll and they are not going to do it.  People can draw their own conclusions from these facts.  In the end, time will tell who was right.  Right?

@Sho, I hope my question doesn't get too buried in this thread: how long should the negative feedback stand in the case that all continues to go fine with dadice?

I think the same could be said of their other potential investors. I would argue that just because they are not allowing new investors to invest does not mean they are no longer accepting investor money.

I have to say I've been impressed with your posts recently. You have a knack for getting right to the core of the issue and making it clear. Good job! :)


I think I have done the right thing. DaDice's actions have raised red flag suggesting that they don't have the coins they claim to have. For me this makes it quite likely that they will pull an exit scam at some point. It's possible they are insolvent and hoping that players will lose enough on their site to make up the shortfall. That's likely how MtGox was operating too, insolvent and hopeful, and we all saw how that ended up. I think the right thing to do here is to raise the concern, link to the relevant information, and let each potential player make up their own mind.


You're suggesting that even if you strongly suspect a site to be insolvent and offering bets it can't safely afford, you shouldn't start asking questions until they actually stop allowing withdrawals? But by then it's too late and everyone has lost their money. Currently they're offering fixed 20 BTC payouts with a sub 1k bankroll. I've seen mention that the actual bankroll is 10x smaller, due to "kelly" multipliers, so maybe it's only 100 BTC in reality, and so could be wiped out in just 5 bets if the maximum payout doesn't automatically adjust. I don't know enough about how the site works to know if that's a real risk, but a little transparency in that regard would be useful. How can you safely offer 20 BTC payouts with such a small bankroll?


You're not looking hard enough. It's really the expected thing to do.


MtGox, dice.ninja, pirateat40, etc. all have good reputations before. And bad reputations after. We are currently "before". Should we wait until "after" to change our minds?


MtGox never did a proof of solvency, and it still isn't clear where the MtGox coins are, or how much they were supposed to hold in total. The best they did was asked Roger Ver to read this statement (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4SCAw264qM) for them. He later made this apology (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRIJ_jpmwzo) for getting it wrong. This is why we need *proof* of solvency rather than just having some guy say "they're solvent". Bitcoin lets us do that easily, so why wouldn't we?


They have offered a series of weak excuses for why they couldn't show proof of solvency. That should be cause for concern for anyone who has coins with them. Businesses can run in an insolvent state, paying out all requested withdrawals, for a long time. But when they run out of funds it's over. See MtGox, or any Ponzi in history.


Proof of solvency proves solvency. It's in the name. It doesn't prove anything about trustworthiness. It simply proves that they still have the coins they were entrusted with. Isn't that worth proving? Isn't it alarming if someone who you trusted to look after coins for you refuses to show you that they still have them and makes up weak excuses about why they can't?


Their unwillingness to do the right thing and demonstrate their solvency is a warning sign that needs to be flagged. They way they reacted to the community requesting proof of solvency is another red flag. Nobody is telling them what to do. Rather, we are warning potential customers who might otherwise be unaware of DaDice's actions.

I think you need to change "do the right thing" to "do what we say is the right thing".  Presumably they don't agree that doing what you say is the right thing.  Anyway, I'm not suggesting that you guys remove your negative feedback now, I'm suggesting that at some point in the future, if things continue to go fine with dadice (they offer their service, people use it, can withdrawl as needed) then it would seem that you'd admit that your warnings were unfounded and you'd remove the negative feedback.  You'd say, "well they never proved their solvency to me but I guess they didn't really have to do that and it's been X (days/months/years/centuries) now and I guess I can safely remove this warning. " If that's right, I'm curious how long you think the warning should stand.  What's the right value and unit for X?

I wonder how much your judgement is being coloured by wearing their signature. Or mine by being in competition with DaDice. I do know I have considered proof of solvency to be important for a long time, before I started Just-Dice, before I had such "competition".

Consider the situation: when asked about their solvency, they produced a string of feeble excuses for why they couldn't provide it. Once all these excuses were demonstrated to be feeble they would rather remove the investment feature from their site than prove solvency.

Ask yourself why they would do that. It makes them look guilty, when proving solvency would be so easy.

It strikes me that the only reason I wouldn't prove solvency in such a situation would be if I couldn't.

The warnings are there because they are a new site offering large bets with a small bankroll and are unwilling to prove that the bankroll exists. That's something worth warning about. The question of how long warnings should stay up for is a difficult one. I have scammers PMing me saying "it's been a year since I scammed, and I paid everyone back when I was caught, so can you remove the warning now?"... I don't remove it. They scammed once, they'll likely try it again. It doesn't matter that they've gone a year without scamming. If you had cause to believe MtGox was insolvent 2 years before they finally shut down, how long should you leave the warning up for? If they never prove their solvency, you have to reason to believe anything has changed.

@above, I understand your position here.  I think it's been made quite clear, below you start to address my question.
But "scamming once" isn't the situation here.  You guys have all admitted that what this adds up to is that you find it fishy they don't want to prove their bankroll.  You say you need to warn people about this, that seems fine.  However, and I understand this is hypothetical, it seems that what dadice is arguing is that they don't need to do what you say in order to provide a legit service to their customers/investors.  Presumably you would agree that at the end of the day, what matters is whether or not they can provide a legit service for their customers/investors and that time will tell about whether or not they can actually do this.  It seems to me that a lot of the strength behind you guys' argument that what they are doing is "fishy" amounts to the fact that 1) others who haven't proved bankroll have ended up non-legit 2) these guys haven't been around for too long.  On (1), presumably dadice says "well, we're not those other guys" on (2) at some point, I'd think enough time would have elapsed s.t. (2) wouldn't really be a legitmate criticism.  Consider, for example, that if you or Stunna decided to keep some information private, you'd be able to point to your long-standing reptuation as legit if people questioned you.  At some point in the future, I'd think that dadice also graduates to that class.  I'd also think that at that point, you guys would have to say "well, okay, they never showed us their bankroll, but I guess you weren't scammers".  Right?


Well I guess 2 years is a long time.  And maybe for you, someone who doesn't prove their solvency is always in the class of people who you have cause to believe they are insolvent.

this is pointless.
ponzi will scam becuse they promise to give you % on your invest.
when you invest in dice they have 1% house edge means on end they will probably win that 1% and they profit from people lossing money on gambling. witch ponzi dont. you cant compare those 2 things its totaly diffrent.
when you invest in dice you just profit when other people playing lose.
and till now there is no any sign of trying to scam so you can stop bumping this thread.
regards
-katerniko1

OK, but "doing something flag-worthy" is. And the question is whether flag-worthiness diminishes over time.


What is fishy is that they would rather offer weak excuses and then remove part of their site rather than offering a proof that would strengthen their image. This undoubtedly makes them look bad when they could look good, if only they were solvent.

There have been so many instances of scammy Bitcoin services that it's not unreasonable to expect the legit ones to take the simple step of showing that they are solvent. The ones that refuse to do so without good reason are likely not able to.


Yes, that is all that matters. But "time will tell" isn't helpful. People want to know whether it is safe to deposit there right now. Waiting a month to see if they shut up shop or not isn't helpful. If they don't, you still can't safely invest because maybe they close down the next day. If they are offering 20 BTC payouts per roll, and have only a 500 BTC bankroll, that isn't "legit". They are taking far too big a risk of bankruptcy, with other people's money.


I guess so. But at what point? I'm horrible at predicting the future. I thought dicebitco.in and dice.ninja were the good guys, and that PRC wouldn't last 6 months. I was wrong in all 3 cases...

Ponzis shut down because they promise to pay out more than they take in, which leaves them insolvent and unable to pay everyone. It's the insolvency that is the problem. If a Ponzi scheme had millions of BTC of their own they could operate for a while paying everyone a nice profit. It would make no sense to do so, but it could happen.

The same with dice sites. The 1% edge is no guarantee. Especially when you're offering 4% of your bankroll as the maximum payout per bet. Variance is "a bitch" as any poker player will tell you. It is easily possible for a dice site to go bankrupt if their maximum payout is too big for the size of their bankroll.

But the main issue here is one of trust. These guys refuse to demonstrate that they still have the coins they are supposed to have, but have offered no good reason for their refusal. The most likely reason is that they no longer have all the coins they are supposed to have.

Just because the campaign worked out, doesn't mean it is not a scam. At this stage it is a probable scam, so is the reason why there is no scam accusation against it . But all those related have already been negative repped.

I would say most of it was probably given out paying for the campaign, and other advertising costs, which they wanted to probably use to become Big. But now that they are required to show the proof, its all backfiring. They also probably showed an increased investment amount which is another reason for them to not show any proof of funds.

That's the case with 99% of this sites which promise too much in return for the investment made and one should think 100 times before investing in such websites. That's what the issue here as well and that's why I said that I hope that they don't become insolvent and bankrupt which can lead to many investors losing their money. Here I would blame the people who invested as well as it wasn't a wise decision.

I think it is better for dadice if they show proof of funds even they don't need to. It is their reputation at stake here. Swallow the pride, provide a proof of solvency and silence the doubters once and for all is the best direction forward.

agreed as otherwise this thread is serving as FUD and dettering players away from the site :O you might be losing players due to this ongoing conflict :O but i believe that DaDice will come up with the proof of a signed message hopefully :D

Let me guess what might happen next. Tomorrow they will come up , and say that all these discussions have affected their business, and some big investor divested from the site. So if their original amount was 500 BTC , then only 100 BTC is left. And they will just show the proof of that.

OR

Some player will get lucky and win big on the site tonight. And they will claim now only a small amount is left out of the investments.

I don't see any reason why a reputedly site would not want to show a proof of funds.
Well,actually there may be many reasons,but all are bad

if they will want to be a good website that everyone wants to play and if they want to attract new players they will have to show it

Some proof is better than no proof. Anything over 200 btc is good, if they are willing to share that.

Their bankroll currently shows around 756 BTC invested. 200 BTC is actually not good enough. If they used the investor funds for other things, or faked even half of the investment data, then they will be able to show that much proof.

Twipple, what's your interest in this?  Do you really think you're adding anything to the above discussion?  We can see you posting repeatedly here and in the dadice thread but to what end?

I'd think that everyone can agree that everyone has said their piece and that time will tell at this point who was right.  Certainly those calling for proof of bankroll have made their arguments known.  We've all seen the refusal to do so.  Lets just see what happens.  Flame wars aren't really going to add anything or make anything more clear than it already is.  The next step is for people to make their own decisions about where to play dice and what to do with their money.  What am I missing?

Here's my input on this from a gamblers point of view. If I'm gambling on a site, I do prefer to be able to see if they can cover the bet I am placing. There would be no need for opaqueness unless something is wrong with funds. I can say, "Hey I bet you a million dollars" but we both know I don't have it, but if I say, "Hey, I bet you $5 dollars" then people start thinking. Hmm. Maybe he's for real, lets see if you have the $5 bucks. Same with gaming sites. The purpose of the gaming license is to "supposedly" show that you have "x" amount of funds to cover the house. With BTC its a lot different because now you have to factor in lots of other variable such as price, supply, and the validity of the operator. If I trust the operator, fine I do not need to see the funds. If I do not trust him, I need to see the funds. So with BTC I feel that it is pretty much at the investor/gamers opinion if they want to see this. If DaDice does not reveal their investors funding/balance I would feel like something is being hid from me in my personal opinion and would have to make a decision on whether to trust them or not.

This Dadice drama is more interesting than the new season of game of thrones. Noone knows who is gonna die (scam) next  8)

Good point.

One thing I've been wondering... now that this is out in the open, will they start losing members and get "hacked" sooner then expected?  :D I'm not talking about those "fan boy" or whatever you want to call them type of members either. They'll be there to the end no matter what.

No doubt, they will have a reduced number of members as compared to earlier.

Judging from their actions they should have seen this coming. Running a business based on trust can only be done by playing with open cards.

That's right

Why am I going to trust you my money, If you are not showing users the transparency of your site?

Running an investment pool privately is not a bad thing, I bet dooglus will concur it :) May be Da Dice has shown its solvency to their private investors?

private my arse.. no proof at all, just plain talk shit. go shill in the dadice thread if you can't show proof at all

so people here trust investing at dadice? if so any here invested more than 1 btc there? would ike to know. thanks

They say nobody is invested there any more.

When asked to chose between transparency and opacity they chose opacity. It's worrying, but there's nothing anyone can do to change it.

I guess we just have to wait and see what happens now.

Seriously I can't think of a good reason (except the obvious one) why they chose not to show their cold wallet address. There is nearly nothing they would lose for publishing the address especially if they show it only to a few highly trusted people. On the other hand, many of their players and investors have lost confidence in them for not publishing it.

I doubt there's much point in me offering to discretely verify a wallet address for them, but I'm willing to if it helps them out. I know Stunna already offered, and I'm just another dice site owner, but there's the offer for what it's worth.

Best I can tell, that's (still) it!  I agree that failure to prove the amount of coins you have does not constitute a scam.  However, at the same time, if you are going to claim to have X coins, you should expect people to ask you to prove it if you are operating a business.

Maybe they would be better off just doing what Stunna does and having a max bet that they can obviously pay and just stop talking about how many coins they have.

Dooglus and just-dice has set the bar really high here for integrity, but that does make his practices a requirement?  If dadice doesn't want to prove they have a lot of coins that is their call.  

Likewise it is the community's call if it wants to play/invest there.  And while I like the way this was laid out by the OP, I don't think it rises to level of scam or quasi scam or proto scam, it just suggests what we all know, player and especially investor beware - this organization is not acting as honestly as the best in the business currently do.

Good Luck!

So did they also return the money all those who were invested ? Or did they only stop new investments for now ? From what they said before , they didn't show the address of the largest investor. Then why not just refund him, and continue and be transparent with the rest.

It's not even about not acting honestly. It's more about transparency than honesty.

It is possible that they are being honest, really do have all the coins they claim to have, but for some reason don't want to prove it. There's nothing dishonest about such a stance.

It's also possible that they don't have all the coins they claim to have, and so can't show their cold wallet address without admitting to the problem.

As it stands we are left suspecting that they are insolvent, but we have no proof either way.

A simple signed message will do, I dont think time can restore the faith in them.

people have played on dadice and will play on it as most of them dont care about cold storage and stuff they just want good design and thats it

Ok, I care and my warning is for those that do. You are free to ignore it.

Oooh, you are advertising a ponzi, I get it.

I am watching this thread rather heavily in anticipation of me updating the Overview of Popular Bitcoin Gambling Websites thread and bringing it back up to standard soon. So essentially, you think they're just going to make a runner? The images you have in the OP are rather telling and indicative of an issue.

Wouldn't you think most players would care that the site is able to actually pay them out in the event that they won a lot?

In my opinion, it's hard to tell whether the behavior of dadice is actually shady (ie, indicative of someone about to do a runner) or merely reflective of someone who feels like they're being pushed around.  That is, out of nowhere, all sorts of folks started demanding all sorts of proof about their bankroll.  At first, several competitors of dadice were the ones offering to "privately" verify the bankroll.  It seems to me that a perfectly legitimate interpretation is that dadice felt pushed around, decided to stand up for their rights not to reveal their private information, and to stand on their budding reputation as a legit site.

The other situation has also been clearly expressed by the detractors in this thread, ie, they won't prove their bankroll because they can't.  I'm in the camp which believes that the best thing to do here now is to let everyone's head-of-steam cool down for a while and see what happens.


Yes, of course they would.  But a lot of players will consider that withdrawing and deposting with success again and again is indicative of future success.  I'm not here to debate the logical flaws in that sort of reasoning, I just think it's worth bearing in mind that the point of view of the typical player isn't about whether some mysterious wallet backend banksafe exists (they don't expect to be able to see it if does), but whether the stuff they *do* see works well, ie, their own deposits and withdrawals.

I agree, it is impossible to tell the motivation behind refusing to show proof of solvency.  But that action alone destroys the site's reputation.  "We don't want to prove out solvency because people are asking us to" isn't a valid reason.  Now, I agree, if I was in their shoes, I probably wouldn't show a competitor my addresses (although why that would matter I don't know) but there are hundreds of trustworthy people in the community they could show.  Why aren't they doing that?  Nobody knows.  But seeing as there is no good reason to not (especially since, you know, they claim on their site that they will) the only explanations left are shady ones.

We don't need to wait and see what happens.  That's how people lose money.  We already know what happened.  They were asked to prove their solvency and didn't.  Is it because they couldn't?  Is it because they didn't want to?  It doesn't matter.  All that matters now is that they have to be assumed as insolvent by any reasonable person. 

I gamble a little here and there and do not have preference to any one dice site. I would avoid any dice site that cannot prove they have the bitcoin to pay us.

Which dice sites has shown their solvency by disclosing their cold wallet address? I might play their more often.

NLNico compiled a good list (in reply to the claim from DaDice that competitors also don't show solvency):

Unfortunately the Just-Dice link was broken when the CLAM developers switched from one block explorer to another again.

Addresses #1 and #3 on the CLAM rich list (http://blocktree.io/richlist/CLAM) are the JD coins. They both begin "xJDCLAMZ" in case the order changes.

Thanks RHavar, I will play more on these sites.
I am surprised not seeing PrimeDice on the list ???

No one really doubts the solvency of PrimeDice, and in general I don't think it's big deal if non-investing sites show solvency or not. Sites that make extraordinary claims and investment sites should be held to a higher standard, though. In fact, I'd say it's absolutely critical in investment sites as it's our only proof that profits are generated from a means other than it being a big ponzi.

All of those sites offer investments and need to post that information for the peace of mind of their investors. Primedice does not accept investments and our users rarely store massive balances. Users frequently cash out their winnings, often less than a weeks worth of expected profit is comprised by balances.

That being said PD probably has a larger bankroll than any bitcoin dice site currently, at least from what I've seen. We made a simple mistake which allowed ourselves to have 2400 coins stolen from us via exploit but even at that exact moment we definitely had at least 10-20x the total stored PD balances locked away in cold storage. We've since  quickly re-couped those losses and made improvements to prevent that from happening again.

If we were to ever accept investments which I think is very unlikely, we would absolutely have proof of reserves available for users.

Reading through the thread in my opinion the burden of proof is on the operator to prove they have reserves not on the users regardless of the percentage of funds held by users if the funds are all mainly held in a cold wallet the deposits would be in one address keeping the individual user balances relatively anonymous, and they can still prove their own reserves.
An absence of that does seem concerning and based on the timeline disabling investments was the logical choice next would be to prove they can cover large bets.

hey Stunna, the guys over at saw-dice, the new one, claims to have a bankroll rivalling that of PD's, somewhere in the 5 digit range, and promise to show proof of storage after their 0% edge promotion is over. they also claim they wont have a limit to bet/win amounts. any thoughts on having a competitor like that with a bankroll that could, even currently, rival that of your site?

There are many alarm bells here. But I'm getting tired of explaining them. We all know what is going on here and its no secret they don't have a secret investor. For what reason would anyone want to remain secret!

The other thing that simply pisses me off is this "Innovation" word used for a dice site. there is nothing innovative about it. In fact its quite poorly innovated and just a dice site with the help pages 'cut and pasted' from other dice sites. Diggit is innovative, DaDice is just another dice site.

On the coding side, we all can't be perfect. My coding sucks balls, but even I wouldn't be doing what DaDice does:

Who sends entire JS functions over the socket when you click a link? DaDice does!
Who lets the client send the socket details to the different servers instead of using a redis server to keep all session information on the server? DaDice does!
Who advertises number of rolls as being equal to site success without even displaying a total wagered number? DaDice does!
Who advertises no bots playing on their site even though their site has a bot built into it? DaDice Does!

Everything about it is just bullshit. And to pile on top, they are lying about having a bankroll of 500BTC.

If they are genuinely legit (which is about a 1% chance), they are the worst business people on the face of this planet! Which is good enough reason, in itself, to steer clear from them.

They recently claimed that they have shutdown investments so there is no excuse any more along with any excuse of not showing the funds.

I really don't understand why they would not show their cold storage, it only really leaves one answer and that is they can't  :-\ I thought they was legit and to be fair they have not scammed yet so they may well be just not liking bowing down to demands which I may add I would not have either (But would in the end) just not when everyone wants me to (unless it was investors) Do we know any of the investors? Was they shown the storage surly they was? Also would not have been hard to follow your investment, if you guys was so interested why not invest a small amount and follow the money honey? Where are you investors  ??? ???

They claimed that they provided each investor with over 1 BTC with an individual cold storage, so I doubt following the money trail would lead you to it. But that excuse lets them be insolvent or show incorrect investment stats.

That's not good for them, hope they can fix this ASAP.

I think its too late for that. They shut down their investments soon after the incident, which is something no business usually does, and that only points to the fact that they are insolvent.

Yup, it feels like its being run by a teenager. The bad coding, the defensive responses and childish "I dont allow investment then" statement.

It is reason for concern that they act like my kids when they don't get their way!

A professional would just bow to public pressure and do it to save their business. No point in taking offense.

Plus the sig campaign manager got neg rep for extortion, It seems a bad end of the month of dadice.

I've noticed the chatroom has over like 60+ users online but i decided to ask questions and no one responded. I don't know if those are real people who are just in idle mode or bots.. :/

Yea with accusation against ndnhc this just seems really bad for dadice, at this point who knows what role has ndnhc really on that site. Furthermore i told them in their thread that they now have an obligation to show funds not because of investments but because of the neg trust. I mean if you were they and you had that amount of neg trust and the only way to get rid of it would be to show the funds, why woulndt you do it?

If i was participating in their sig campaign i would quit asap.

I find it odd also that they wouldn't publish their cold storage wallet. However with the large amounts of BTC invested in their signature campaign looks like they could be fully invested.

Their site is still new and most likely didnt turn profit yet from the sig campaigns.

nah, they're still getting BTC from the signature.. why would they quit :P

threads like this helps the crypto comunity.




i deal with a lot of crypto gambling sites and dadice has always had me guessing.

Dicebitcoin used to have a massive campaign as well, this could be a trick to lure more player or investor so that they could get away with alot more btc but it is good that they are now stopping the investment feature, less people will be scam if they decided to run away now

Well if i was wearing their signature i would be worried that in the future i might not get paid. They could run with all the money and never come back soon enough, its not like they would be the first ones to do so, there have been a good amount of casinos that scammed unfortunately.

For people saying, but why would they invest in sig campaigns and giveaways, well its simple and obvious, the more customers the more money they can steal if they plan to scam afterall.

As far as I'm aware they found themselves another campaign manager in the interim (can't recall who it is at the moment), so most of the campaign participants don't seem to be worried.

What I'm more curious about is if they've refunded everyone who was invested there? I haven't looked very hard for it yet - so I'm not up to date on whether investments have been repaid or not - only that they refuse to show proof of funds.

Why doesn't devthedev or whoever is running the show code a counting bot that will pay automatically after a line of writing and spare himself all the hassle.

For signature campaigns? Posts need to be checked and things like that. I was tempted to make a website where signature campaign managers can offer their services, signature campaign owners can go to find a manager, and people who want to participate in a signature campaign can go to find one but I can't be bothered. Even that would only save the log side of things e.g. spreadsheets. Managers are basically a necessity.

A necessity for what exactly? The forum has been ridden with spam scams and drama and people go to learn about bitcoins to other sources of information. The circle jerk is running this shitshow here anyway.

What will happen if someone ask to stunna %post your cold storage address%? DaDice should post the proof or they are only scammer.

That is kind of true, but Bitcointalk is still quite large and obviously the (mostly casinos) companies/people who want to run signature campaigns find some kind of benefit from it else they wouldn't pay for them. You can't really argue with the money-flow.

#1 what does this have to do with the topic at hand?

#2 if you want to advertise your siganture (as you both do) and/or buy the signature from someone else for advertising purposes it is in your interest to make sure that spam is dealt with. Preferably not by admins. BadBear has been swinging the ban hammer very well, but there will be a point where they are just sick of it and just bad signature campaigns. If you think a bot can handle this you are mistaken. You will need a human to judge the quality of a post in its context (for now). Marcotheminer is using a bot to assist the count, but AFAIK is still doing manual checks. Ndnhc et al. are very strict which posts/users they pay for which is a good development and takes some of the burden from the staff.

Yeah, my bad it is off-topic, I guess it only slightly relates in that dadice runs a signature campaign. Was just answering a question I saw though.

OT, so dadice is still refusing to verify cold storages? I plan to add an entry for them to my Overview thread today, so if they still are...the ratings are gonna drop.

lets hope this doesn't turn into another shitshow like dicebitcoin and dice.ninja

Im fine with offtopic replies as long as its not derailing the thread, but if you start a parallel discussion its probably best to move it elsewhere.


AFAIK they just disabled the option to invest and ignored everything afterwards. I think its reasonable to assume that one of them would contact me directly or via proxy should they make a a signed message public verifying their funds. I will certainly change the OP and my rating and let you know here when this happens.


fingers crossed.

After reading this thread in happy that I decided to join a different campaign for now... This feedback is not good for any service. Although it seems their manager has returned to the campaign thread!

when you was part of this campaign i didn't see you there even in archives list too, i didn't agree with agree with your post that is totally misleading as they are using funds of escrow for their campaign and paying the competitive rates for this.

Sorry but i don't have understand, the problem  of webmasters don't add a prove to cold wallet is only for investor or also for players?

Both of them are in risk because if a site could not provide a solvency proof then there is a chance that the site might turn out to be a scam site. That is why most gambling site provide their cold address to prove solvency, so that people could play there without worrying about their withdrawal not getting through

You might want to add dadice_pr to the list of accounts associated with DaDice.

According to this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973765.msg11989851#msg11989851) post, it is an "official" DaDice account.

profile link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=538753

No, they actually hid the option to invest while publicly saying they were not accepting investments. This was brought to light when this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1114399.0) scam accusation was opened against them.

You claim dadice is a scam site in the profile, and you bumped this dead thread again, why do u hate dadice so much, they paid u a lot in sig campaign, and currently we don't see any proofs that dadice refuses to pay.

But satoshidice is indeed scamming people, why u guys don't give SD neg rate?

Also I have post a thread in scam accusation to claim PMpoker is a scam site, I have solid proofs, but none of you guys gave him neg rate.

It is unfair to give dadice neg rate but don't give neg rate to real sites.

There isnt any need to start all over this thing again. The negative trust is some sort of warning and not a sole guidance as people are free to proceed at their own cost. Bringing this matter over and over again wont change any rating of Dadice because if they want their rating to be changed, all they need is to sign a simple BTC address which they refused .

Furthermore, if you got a site that you suspect as a scammer than you will just need to PM few guys on default trust, it is not likely every one of them going on a patrol in scam accusation

I think it's quite well and good for fox to question what QS is doing here.  His vitriol regarding dadice stands out and makes one ask why.  Yes, others on default trust have neg-repped dadice, but QS shows up in the dadice thread semi-regularly and trolls, and takes opportunities to call them a "scam site" on unrelated threads as well.  Now he's bumping a month old thread twice in once day.  I think it's fair to ask why.

I see QS being a little partial to Da Dice. :P

Well, with all this, it wouldn't be surprising for you to bump a 2 month old thread twice for the opportunity to get a newbie account one more negative trust..

Added them to the OP, thanks.

@QS, what exactly is your definition of a scam?

It doesn't currently go: "All sort of things and matters, that Quickseller deems a scam".
May be update your trust feedback that it is only your humble and possibly incorrect opinion?




Please be kind enough to point out who has been scammed by Da Dice?

Don't mind ndnhc, both shorena and quickseller are now promoting a white label "Casino" with no proof to be provably fair (no RNG Certificate) and with no cold wallet address that is covering the jackpot of 3,800+ btc. That is how credible they really are  ;D Funny isn't it ???

What a pity, they promoted your site very actively but now are both claiming dadice is scam, I can't understand why, I think you paid them the best rate, but they don't know to be grateful. And you haven't scammed anyone so far, how can they claim you are scam.

Does it mean that the sites who provide the cold address has no chance to be a scam site in the future?
I'd say that providing cold address to prove solvency is not a guarantee, because there is always a chance for them to choose not to pay out.
Not mention to defend Dadice, but I'm saying in general.

So you think that as long as a site pays people who would potentially call them out as being a scam, such people should not call them out? I can't speak for shorena, however I can say that my trust is not for sale. DaDice was paying for a service (advertisements), and they got it from both myself and shorena. I stopped providing my services when I got a better offer (although I also would have stopped when I discovered they were a scam), and shorena stopped providing his services when it turned out that DaDice was a scam site.

No, but not providing a cold storage address means that there is no proof that such site is not running a ponzi and/or is actually able to payout the bets that they are accepting. Not showing a cold storage address means that no one has any reason to believe that DaDice has as large of a bankroll as they claim, as there is zero evidence that they do.

If you guys[1] dont stop bringing up other casinos than dadice this topic will get locked. If you cant stay on topic, dont bother posting here. If you have something to say about my rating feel free to contact me. I dont think have ever labeled you as scammers my rating is a warning and phrased as such.


I do not claim this, I just voice my opinion that I would not play or invest there and I see all signs of a scam. This is a difference. I no longer advertise for dadice because of this. I would think its very strange to advertise for something you would not use, because you are afraid of your coins.


No, there is no way proof that you will not scam in the future regardless of what information you provide. It is however a common thing to provide a cold storrage address and requesting such. Dadice reaction on the request is what makes many of use feel they are a scam about to happen and no longer want to be associated with them. As I said in the past, I hope I am wrong, but I also cant just stand aside and not do what I can to warn about this.

[1] and other entities. Even its phrased as such this not only towards dadice.

Well, QS is labeling Da Dice as scammers with some weirdo proofs.
http://i.gyazo.com/8447d64976f4b8b2c05f748d7b038cca.png

Either way, I am and was fine with your negative feedbacks, since I can understand your's, El Nico's, dooglus' concern well. But QS is tagging it as a scam which is what I am questioning.



I agree with you on that.



Signing a cold wallet address doesn't mean dice owners cannot run with their funds. Currently, many players reach the conclusion that a signed message means their funds are safe, which unfortunately is not true.

Yes, but not providing a cold wallet address does not make it a scam. I am honestly, not aware of PD having made public their cold wallet address. May be I am wrong, but if not, well, why not?


Ignore the grammar plz

What's more, he's attempting to put words into Shorena's mouth just above:


I basically completely agree with ndnhc here.  It's one thing to say that you wouldn't play there and to warn others accordingly, it's another thing to troll dadice's threads, calling them scammers, calling people associated with them scammers, and all with zero scam or evidence of scam.  All based on some kind of bad feeling.  Dadice should notice the very stark difference in approach between Shorena and Quickseller and shouldn't be lumping them into the same bucket, IMO.

The only thing I'd add is that while I understand that Shorena doesn't want to talk about other casinos here, I think it is relevant to ask him why he feels okay with promoting (and presumably playing) at the casino he's currently advertising if they haven't shown their cold-storage wallet, etc.

Finally, as I asked upthread, I wonder what the statue of limitations is on this bad-feeling that he has.  As has been pointed out, many many casinos are offering services without showing cold-storage addresses.  Apparantely not all of them generate the same bad feeling for Shorena.  I wonder how many months/years would have to go by before Shorena would be willing to say "hell, okay, maybe they never showed their cold storage address but they have now  been offering services for XX years/months and it's clear that they're not in it to scam, they're merely offering a gambling service and profiting on the house edge".

They are making the situation very complicated, they should give a cold wallet signed address and then we see how it goes on.
I already suspected something since their signature campaign thing,but this is very very suspicious.

I think that is because it is off topic, this is about dadice not the other, perhaps you can open up another thread


Shorena is a very fair person because after months or years operating without issue , he will change his rating to neutral. Look at what he did , he change marcotheminer rating to neutral after months. I think shorena make a very fair claim here and I dont see that is issue warning people about this.

Funny that people is talking only about quickseller and shorena when dadice has plenty of negative ratings from other trusted members as well so it wouldn't really matter what shorena does at this point, obviously a good amount of trusted people think they are a scam

Correct, if you have anything that makes you think any other casino should be warned about open a thread about said casino and I will most likely see it. If not feel free to send me a PM.

To the other point, Ill just quote my last answer.



I am indeed more forgiving than e.g. Quickseller and have change ratings to neutral even though I had several people asking me not to/to change it back to negative. I dont have a strict policy regarding this, but the latest reply from DaDice has if anything strengthened my believe that they are not professionals and should not be trusted with any coins.

My only point is the whole thing is set up on the speculation that not providing a cold storage address makes it a scam. It doesn't. It is fine, may be suspicious. But does PD has that? Why not?

As I said signing a cold wallet address doesn't mean dice owners cannot run with their funds. Many still think there is some kind of magic with that, and the funds will be safe. Why?

no one thinks that, that's a straw man agrument.  ::) but nice try...


the cold wallet is only providing the information that the casino owns the amount claimed and is solvent. dadice is already failing at that, despite taking investments.

everybody that doesnt get paid to have a non-conclusive opinion will agree that this is at least shady  as fuck, especially in accordance to how the whole dadice story has unfolded so far.

we've seen it all before more than once...

:P

Does PrimeDice (and many other sites) have public cold wallet address? Please let me know if it does. If it doesn't, why not?

pd aint taking investments.  ::) also there are (older) known pd cold wallets one can find with a little google-fu. stunna also isnt anonymous. and I'm confident that stunna would provide the necessary info if there ever should be the case that it's needed.

on the other hand, dadice will never be able to provide that info, even if they wanted.

so yeah, guess you can put the straw men back into the closet now.

There is no need to rehash an argument that has already been made way before this thread even was needed. PrimeDice is not the issue here.

If anyone has anything new to contribute to the thread, PM me.

Due to recent news I decided to change my feedback to neutral.


The thread will stay unlocked as long as the discussions here stay on topic.