Bitcoin Forum

Royse777 has been caught, no matter how hard his buddies try to hide him.

After Bitlucy777 fiasco, he is now back with Casino Critique trying to raise 10 BTC, in collusion with his DT friends.

Let's hope no one is foolish enough to throw their money away.

You may be right and you may be wrong, either way you need to present proof instead of throwing something at the wall and hoping it sticks. You also probably need to be a man and use your real account instead of hiding like a chickenshit. Don't be a pussy and claim you're scared you'll be targeted.

One more coward with no balls using his alt account and speaking about some nonsense dt secret conspiracy theory that nobody really cares about, and all this without any proof,
I don't care about anything you say until you use your real account.
Go get a life.

I think he is a pussy now.

The OP is fine with his alt when he doesn't want to do it with the main account. Even though you both think he's a coward for not using the main account, but that's allowed and not against the rules.

I'll just focus on what he wants to talk about, those are accusations. But I'd really like to see some evidence so the OP doesn't talk about baseless, false accusations. So, I hope the OP can complete some proof before making a new drama in reputation board.

Which DT friends are colluding with him? if you are going to bring up an allegation about connected accounts, then make it count. Where is the proof for example?
Using an alt account to throw around allegations with no proof makes you look more like a troll

seriously, who the fuck died and made you the king of the forum?   if Theymos says its ok to use a alt account, then you need to shut the fuck up with your threatening curse words. you little pussy

Nothing threatening in my message. You don't like being called a chickenshit or a coward, then quit acting like 1. We are supposedly adults here but most of you act like children. No wonder the place is dying.

Unless you got some proof for your accusations you can moan and bark forever, you didn’t like what yahoo said because he was 100% right you have no balls to talk with your own account, and just like a little girl started cursing everyone who’s against you instead of defending yourself and prove what you said about royse. You knew that talking shit and spreading lies won’t get you anywhere that’s why you choosed to use a newbie account, if you had a small evidence you would use your original account because everyone will help you. I smell jealousy and hate. You’re disgusting

WTF is going on in reputation board LOL?
Two brand new accounts against two managers in this thread. In another thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5412164.0) another troll against another manger.
Shall we all call it a war between managers and bounty cheaters? The cheaters are in guerilla mood and managers are trying to hold their grounds.

Or we shall call it a football match. Managers are the Messi, Ronaldo, Neymar. On the other hand those trolls are some unknown third league players constantly foul playing so that they do not concede many goals. Where is the fucking referee to show cards?🤣

now more people are creating new accounts to make accusations like this. attack the bounty manager and DT members.

I have no problem with using alt accounts to make accusations. but please make more sense and provide sufficient evidence. instead of just attacking with stupid accusations to build wild opinions.
if the allegations with evidence and indeed proven. I don't think there will be any DT members to protect and support. give evidence, don't just scream like a girl who just menstruated.

This forum, as far as far putting your money in (whether investing or using the scam platforms advertised) is either the place for dumb money or for when somebody makes mistakes. Since dumb money has short memory, do not expect it to get better. It's a learning place though for cases when somebody admits to a mistake using anything advertised here.

Although trolling is not allowed, trolls are treated rather mildly (in many cases the referee pretends all is OK, knowing the spectators are too nice and won't assault the field).
Even more, such "reports", whether they're for real or not, are allowed here.

Imho one big problem is that we tend to take too serious everything and everybody, whether it's new account made for a specific purpose, to trolls, to various (useless) dudes on Twitter or the news.



Unless you have (and show) any proof I have no idea why some tend to take you serious.

The 'referee' always lets the match go on though, telling the players to wear a tougher skin, it helps so the match goes on without too much stoppages, though we have var for any dangerous foul play. :D :D

Members here should know by now that nobody is going to waste their time with reports or accusations without without solid proof, and nobody is going to help you check deeper for that proof, if you feel someone has faulted the rules, then you bring the proof, even if you do so with your 10th account, at least do so with meaningful evidence. I notice many reports these days are out of vendetta against another member, that stinks.

True, there is nothing wrong with using an alt account, but its one thing to create an alt account and then provide some solid evidence for the claims (in that case I don't think that people would complain about using an alt) and completely different to do what OP did - zero proof, just some baseless accusations.


He doesn't have squat. If he had, he would already provide it.

maybe they are just angry (although I think it is the same person) because they were not accepted in some of their campaigns. However, they prefer to perform with newly created accounts because they do not want to compromise the possibility of participating in some of their future campaigns.


User CasinoCritique is not the only one in that business, as far as I know, several old members of the forum are involved in it. I believe that it is not difficult to determine if the need arises.

Yeah, I was thinking the same, like WTF?

I think there are a lot of people here who resent the managers for not having accepted them or maybe for having been part of the 1xCrap campaign and having been negative trusted.

On the other hand we have to take into account the example of Solosanz, who started making threads in this section and nowadays is in DT2 and in a signature campaign. So let's not be surprised if imitators come out.

I don't know if you are referring to me, although I understand you don't, as I think BitcoinGirl.Club refers to other accounts. In my case, yes, I am an alt. I created this account because I already have an account on the forum and I thought about making a second one, as many people have. In the future I might say which is my main account, or maybe not, or maybe I won't get very far because I'm not sure I have time to manage two accounts, combining them with my daily activities. In any case, I am not obliged to say so.

Yesterday I was looking for a thread of interest to comment on and I saw the other one about Bitlucy.

I have nothing against Royse777, but after what has been said, I think the following:

1. I think it is more likely to be Royse777 who is behind the Casino Critique account than Darkstar_, as explained in the other thread.

2. Without more data, we cannot be sure. I think the OP is probably a shitposter who was tagged by Royse777 and that's why he talks like that.

3. The two escrows know who is behind this account.

4. If it's Royse777, dkbit98 knows it too and in this case what he has written in this thread would be completely dishonest. The fact that he talks about balls, pussy and conspiracy theories, without clearly stating that it is not Royse777 who is behind the account makes me think even more strongly that it is him.

5. If it's Royse777 and some people on the forum know about it, I don't think it's honest for them to hide it. I understand that after what happened, they want to give him a second chance, but we are talking about a lot of money here. The reason for not saying who is behind it is clear, many people will think twice if someone who was involved with Bitlucy is behind the project, no matter how much the community has forgiven him.

This last point applies, even if the person behind the account is not Royse777. Most likely it is someone who has had reputation problems on the forum, and therefore does not use his main account or does not make it clear, either with a neutral tag or by explicitly saying so, that it is that person who is behind it. Hiding this is not honest with potential investors.

Here we go, cryptohunter v2.0 is booting at full speed, please stand by while we get to the login screen ;D

I don't know who cryptohunter is, although I heard of him on the forum I think.

On the one hand I'm not very clear about the OP's accusation either, but on the other hand, what's Royse777's problem in coming to this thread and saying whether or not he's the one running the account?

I think that it will be barely for someone to understand exactly what you are saying because their is no backups in the exact statement or what you agitating. Any accusation been present do cover with a prove some that when discussing you will no exactly your a point to portray. Only thing i will advice op is to put link to back it's accusation up.

100% butthurt trolls.

Sure, I know who is behind Satoshi account, and I know all other bitcointalk secrets because I am unwilling member of 33 degree high secret occult dt membership  ::)
I don't care who is behind Casino Critique and I don't care about anything related with this Casino thing, so I think you need to drink your medication or check-in for vacation in your local mental hospital.

Full disclosure: I've been helping to edit the Casino Critique website, and although I'm not part of their team I am involved in this, and therefore my reputation now that I've announced it.  I'm not fact-checking, just editing for grammar and the like.

IMO making a big deal out of who's behind the official CC account is a waste of mental energy, because as I said previously the team members (in other words, the people who'd have their feet under the fire if the project turned out to be a scam) have made their identities known.  If you're going to focus on anything, it ought to be who has control over any funds CC has received so far--and I don't have an answer to that.  To my understanding, no decisions are going to be made about use of funds without the 2-of-3 sig security thing in action, so if you're already starting to point fingers, the targets of said fingers are already there.

Also: I happen to believe that there's no intent to scam investors with the CC project.  I think the members behind it really do want to create a casino review site that's going to succeed.  That said, I do understand the skepticism by OP and others (though I think it's overblown given that the team members are listed by name on the CC website).  This isn't exactly like that case we had a while back where some relatively trusted members misused charity funds.  This a group of forum members whose reputations are worth something to them and likely worth more in potential or actual money than they could get by pulling off a scam by colluding to pull in investment money for a fake casino review site.

I've been wrong before, but my gut and my experience is telling me I'm right on this one.

OP, since there is no evidence for your point, you are just making baseless accusations. I am merely stating a fact, I have no ulterior motive in this.

Can you please explain why you think Royse777 and Casino Critique are related?

It is fine to use an alt account to make some accusations,  but what is not fine is making a baseless accusation. However, there is no crime, I have seen people who woke up and head directly to reputation to outpour their illusionary thinking.

In as much as I support the use of alt accounts when it's absolutely needful, I am somewhat skeptical why the accuser should create a new account with Royse's name. It would have been a generic username that could be re-useable when the need arises.


There's no obligations or whatsoever that demands that Royse777 comes to make some statements here. It is fine he comes up with a statement and it is also fine if he doesn't. Remember Royse777 was involved in one Bitlusy saga, if he is actually launching a new project, it is OK to not associate his identity to it. The personality behind the Royse777 account is a genuine personal who has gathered nice reputation in the forum, but the name Royse777 recently got attacks and somewhat stained. Even in business, it's OK to disassociate a certain brand from the other.

Yet, Op is just a baseless accusation and that is what it remains until proven otherwise.

Keeping aside for a moment the member/members behind Casino Critique, he/she/they want to raise 10 BTC for what exactly? Do you have any forum links and their official website address?

What are/is Casino Critique supposed to be doing if they ever get started?

True. It is difficult to argue with that point, why would the OP be hiding their identity?

Please try to refrain from using profanities because it really drags the post or the whole thread in to the gutter. Surely we can try to engage in a civil conversation.

This thread is a prime example of why I'm getting really tired of the reputation board.  It's gotten to be full of self-important busy-bodies attempting to build their own reputations by besmirching the reputations of others.

To those of you who are concerned about the reputation of CasinoCritique; if you don't like the project, don't invest.  The reason CasinoCritique asked me to assist as an escrow is because he felt that my reputation (along with Hhampuz') would reassure folks that they would not get scammed.  Now, I have one of the signing keys and Hhampuz has another, without at least one us going rogue the funds will make it to where they are destined; i.e. paying for services and the wages of the team members.

What's my involvement?  Just as I described above; I'm holding one of the signing keys.  That's it.  If I'm asked to sign a transaction I will require documentation/invoices/receipts to ensure that the funds aren't being misappropriated.  It's my belief that my integrity and honor are the reasons I was asked in the first place, and if I see anything funny going on with the funds, I will be first to cry foul.  If you trust that at least two members of the Escrow team are not out to scam anyone, then rest assured that the project will not turn into a scam.  That's not the same thing as saying that the project will succeed, that you'll have to assess for yourselves.

As for any speculation to who's behind the CasinoCritique account, you'll just have to keep speculating.  Yes, I do know, but I will not be disclosing that information.  I made a promise to keep it secret, and I intend to honor my word.  But by no means does that mean I will allow a scam to occur under my nose.

I think there's an ANN thread somewhere, but their website (or at least for the fundraising part) is here (https://ibco.casinocritique.com/).

I've gone over the contents of the entire site, but as I was just doing a proofreading and making suggestions, I didn't retain details about the overall picture of how much money they're trying to raise.  10BTC is indeed a lot; I'll have to go back and look to see for myself what their goals are as far as that's concerned.  

What they want to achieve is all spelled out on their website, though, and probably in their ANN thread (I think one exists, anyway).  They're trying to start up a crypto casino review site and form partnerships with, I think, advertisers.  The fine details of their business plan, I have no idea about.

Same here to the first part, and though I'm not part of the team if I suspect anything scammy, I'll blow the whistle faster than a ref with his eyes on a goofy NBA rookie.

Edit: CC has their IBCO page (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5409868.0) where they're looking for investors (revenue-sharing partners), but I don't see where they've laid out a goal of how much bitcoin they're trying to raise.  Maybe I need more coffee--and I also haven't re-read their website, either.

You create this thread only to attacked and accused Royse777 of Bitlucy which case I believed has been settled. But you know that your cased has not been settled since then did you pm him or Bitlucy company about the complain?  This your account was created on the September 18, 2022, 07:19:19 PM and you created this thread on the September 18, 2022, 08:28:52 PM. The space is just about 1hour. And I also believe that, your motive of opening this account is to attack Royse777 because of what happened in Bitlucy. Remember he not the owner of the company but was the just a manager who was trying to partner with the company. Therefore, if you are accusing him from Bitlucy issue then you have to bring some real evidences to back up your allegation. Because that case has been closed but is like you were not satisfied with the judgement, so you want to reopen the case again, then evidences are the things lawyers will use to give judgement. As it is, your accusation  is lagging merit, there it is null and void. I also believed that this is not your real account in the forum. You create this account because of Royse777. Please can you state your reasons of the accusation?

how could I take you into refers if you didn't post on this topic? This is your first post here unless the OP's account is yours or @stfu yahoo registered only to give a response to yahoo62278.
at the beginning of your post, you say that it is justified on your part that you do not use the primary account in this discussion, while at the end of the post you consider it dishonourable if the CC user does not use his main account.


just to be clear, I'm not accusing anyone here, I'm just pointing out the fact that several older (more experienced) members of the forum are involved in the whole thing. someone as part of the team, someone as a 3rd service. That's why I think that the identity behind the CasinoCritique account is not a mystery and there are certainly members who know who manages that account. if it matters at all.

I've been following the whole project a little bit since its first appearance, and we have a similar attitude that this is not a scam scheme. Plus, the funds will be held by two reputable members as an escrow.

When I was approached to assist with escrow I was told the goal was to raise a specific dollar amount (expressed in USD) that is less than 1BTC, even at today's price.  But for some, I guess it's easier to shitpost hate, stupidity, and dumb questions directed at sockpuppeting trolls.  Those answers can be found by reading the website, which (by design) is easy to find.

I checked the website. It's a joke. They say "buy one get one free" for the private sale, maximum 1000 chip for private sale. What if someone, as an example, has 2 BTC addresses. It reminds me of the "pay 1 btc, get 2 btc back, maximum 5 btc per person". Are you going to confiscate his funds, like you justify confiscating funds of all players on the casinos advertised here lol

These are individuals with no hope of achieving anything useful for other humans. They can only live hiding behind their screens and scamming others. So even if the project is not a scam in itself, it will be advertising scams as it is done on this forum

And @DireWolf14 being the one "just holding the keys" as he claims is another joke. The reality is he is to be trusted to verify receipts, which is another job, and nobody knows if he's done any of this before (if he's ever got a job before anyway)

Lolz, the worst kind of accusation on this forum is one without any form of evidence, I believe alot of users have mentioned this in their comment on this thread, but what I want you to understand is that, without any form of evidence, your accusation against Royse777 is nothing other than spam.
And I know you know that your accusation post if spam, this is why you didn't make this post with your real/main account, but rather choose to hide behind an alt account.
What exactly did you or do you hope to achieve from this?

I can't speak for the team, but participation in the profit sharing (by buying chips) is anonymous, so there's really no way for Casino Critique to know if someone is buying chips using different addresses.  In addition, the rules state that using multiple addresses is prohibited but they didn't specify in writing what would happen if they found out someone was doing that (that I remember, anyway).  

The above really has me wondering where all your bitterness is coming from.  There's certainly a risk in buying chips, and that risk is that there won't ever be any revenue to share.  That should be clear if you read the terms and conditions page and the details of the revenue pool setup, so there's nothing being withheld as far as I know.  

Unless the team really did get together and cook up a scheme with a scam website, scam advertising, and all the rest--which I seriously doubt, given the reputations of the bitcointalk members listed on the CC site--this is simply some people who want to start a business reviewing online casinos.  

So we'll see.  I'm not sure what happens if a small amount of money is raised through the chip sale, i.e., if they're going to go ahead with the plan or return the money or what.  For the life of me, I can't remember if that was covered in the terms & conditions page.

Bah, it's always been like this.  Well maybe not all the time, but I'd say for most of the time I've been a member here there's been plenty of reputation-smearing drama in this section.  I don't mind it at all, as it offers up opportunities to debate issues and establish whether people can be trusted or not.  Sometimes if you don't challenge things or even talk about them, assumptions are made that can be completely wrong.

By the way, have you seen what's popular on Youtube these days?  It's non-stop besmirching of everything, because that's what people watch.

That's a whole lot better than the large majority of the ICOs, Forks, DeFis and NFTs we've seen over the past years. Many of those took millions, all combined they took billions.
I'm not much for investing in any of those, but I do believe a thorough escrow setup is much better than what most others have done.

You mean other than he probably doesn't know the thread was created?

I've had the same thing where DT Trolls will aganise over every key stroke I've made and weap that I haven't taken their bait all the while I've been offline for a day or two or just am blissfully unaware of the thread.

---

---

OP as others have said here: grow some balls.

So you guys are holding the keys for all funds and coins received on CasinoCritique address?
If this is true than I see no risk for anyone to get tricked or scammed, unless you all collude and ruin your forum reputation forever, that is highly unlikely to happen.
Just don't start any CSW Faketoshi style trust so you could claim that you are the real CasinoCritique later  :D

I think that Casino Critique even gave some free chips for bitcointalk forum members, they never forced anyone to invest anything, and they didn't made some pink happy promises.

Thank you for the information ThePharmacist,  I knew almost nothing about the project though the name might have been mentioned once or twice somewhere.

I had a brief look at the ANN thread and it is something worth examining in detail but this part did make me laugh: "The brainchild of a group of reputable Bitcointalk members. Casino Critique is comprised of a handful of Bitcointalk old-timers. Our ultimate goal is to be one of the leaders in Casino Guide in the year 2027."

So the team leader and probable brains behind the project is Little Mouse?

And reputable naim027 is banned right? I guess better to use that name when seeking funds rather than his alt-account called Dic3L0v3r because that would be a real put-off for investors  ;D

I have had little or no interaction with most of the names on the list therefore am unable to make a judgement call on them all but I see nothing there at all that gives me any confidence in this project. Just by looking at the names of some members listed that I have no time for, I would be inclined to advise all to look at the project with caution.

https://i.postimg.cc/7YR1pTJ9/IBCO-2-bitcointalk-Copy.png


On a serious note, I think it is clear having someone as reputable and trustworthy as Hhampuz (who is part of a very small group I trust) as an escrow-only gives the group the opportunity to use his name and reputation as a way to entice investors either by design or by default.

Do you not feel maybe by having your name attached to this project (even as an unpaid contributor) you are risking your reputation? I mean if they have a well respected forum member such as yourself saying you are helping out on their website it could in the eyes of investors and newbies be taken as you giving the project a seal of approval-to-invest and I am sure that is not your intention.

DireWolfM14 is also part of escrow there, I would suggest you read his post in this thread, you probably missed it. He is very clearly explained his position in the whole story (I believe that Hhampuz also has a similar statement)
Check here > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5414027.msg60969839#msg60969839

I am not a potential Investor. But do you still suggest everyone consider the project cautiously after reading Direwolf's statement?


I believe Hhampuz and Direwolf are among the most trusted escrows in this forum. I don't see anything scammy here after reading that. But, I also wouldn't be surprised if you Stick with your statement after understanding what Direwolf said. Because you always see everything with caution and it's become your favorite thing to do. I didn't forget that you Distrust my Judgment Just because I made This (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5403679.msg60500779#msg60500779) and This (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5403679.msg60593947#msg60593947) posts.

A piece of Friendly advice: Don't hunt for ghosts everywhere. LOL

Guys, see what the OP did?

He just fired an accusation at our direction and disappeared.

He intends to sow discord between us. So don't fall for his bait.

How about 2 addresses used in same transaction at some point. How about same person posting about their addresses mentioning the 2 participating addresses. It wouldn't be surprising for them to seize funds.
It is just funny and stupid to limit the amount per address, as this could be easily circumvented, with just a bit of intelligence, but of course we're not talking about intelligent people here either way.



It's all about how the potential investor interprets things. Their terms and conditions won't make them successful. The risk is that of being scammed, not whether if it is going to be successful or not. The informed investor will never put a dime in such a thing. It would be smarter to play a rogue slot machine than putting a dime in this thing, at least a rogue slot pays some of the money back.



returning the money lol yes of course, with the reputation they have as you say, they're very much trustworthy in doing that.

Come on examplens! Are you kidding me? Didn't you see it?


This small group consists of his campaign manager, the people who have him in their trust list (including you), a few others who speak his voice and of course those balls-less trolls who pop up to create conflicts between forum users like OP. Don't you know it? He does not do anything good to contribute to the community but to harass forum users.

Read his post again (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5414027.msg60975621#msg60975621). Give me a positive sign he was able to notice. He noticed only the people he disliked. And interestingly he has to advise what Hhampuz should do and not. Hey Hhampuz, does it mean everything you do needs approval from JollyGood?

In other words we are doubting DireWolfM14, Hhampuz including others involved in the project has no sense to make a good judgement when they know who is Casino Critique. Very disappointing realization for these well known users.

https://ibco.casinocritique.com/terms-and-conditions/
Ctrl+F and type "return". Two results will highlight.



About more than one address

I don't understand where is your problem. Do you not read before making an accusation?

I'd say it's wise to always use caution before investing in anything, especially crypto projects!

For the record, this is incorrect:
There are only 7,000 (https://ibco.casinocritique.com/#roadmap) "chips" for sale, at 0.001BTC each. I'll do the math for you: they're looking to raise 7 BTC.

I haven't gone through the entire chip allocation structure, but maybe he was referring to this:

https://ibco.casinocritique.com/terms-and-conditions/

There is also a "chips sold" indicator on their website that goes up to 9,499.

https://i.imgur.com/1jwABOd.png

It's still not 10 BTC, though.  ;)

I think the first chip buyers get a discount, and some chips are given away. 7 BTC is still a lot of money though, but nothing compared to the ICOs that collected tens of millions for nothing more than an empty promise.
Eddie13 (click for full context) nicely wrote (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5338254.msg57626971#msg57626971) how the "scam fighting" on Bitcointalk focusses on small things while the big scams get away with it:

Alt accounts might not be against the forum rules but, there are ways to it that can constitute an abuse. It's one thing to create an account and use it for slander or raising accusations or perhaps act as DT from that single account and its another thing to create an account for every response. Like you can see in OP's user and the response to Yahoo62278 on the first page.
Is that really for the best or a way to go about crating and using alts? We've got so many inactive accounts on the forum and adding to the list by crating accounts with existing user names just with a little addition doesn't look okay to me.

Am not very familiar with the project being referred to but I was aware of the Royse777/BitLucy case and the DT's handled it good due to the facts that were presented. Am sure should the accusation as in OP come by any fact, it would be looked into properly and questions would be asked and answered.

Well, Kind of, yeah. I agree that investing in online platforms is not 100% safe. I am not a potential investor. But, I had laughed at Mr. JollyFuck's theory. He asked everyone to look at the project cautiously because he didn't like the team. I would say it's pretty much safe to go with Reputable Bitcointalk escrows than to invest in unknown ICOs. As I already said, I am not a potential investor. So, I am not going to invest. But, If I were to invest, I wouldn't hear Mr. JollyFuck's theory.  ;D

OK, so I should have clarified my statement:  if you assume that what's in the T&C section is true and that the members of CC aren't trying to pull off a scam here, then the risk is basically the same as investing in any business that hasn't gotten off the ground yet.  You believe it's a scam, and I've given my opinion on that and I'm not going to strenuously argue that point, since I can't read the minds of the people behind CC and I don't have any more knowledge of how they're going to operate than you do.

I disclosed my participation because I don't want my reputation tarnished in any way should something bad happen, and it's later discovered that I had something to do with the project.  I'm not, in fact, part of it; I just did the editing, since the website is in English and they needed someone proficient in that language.  I wasn't even in control of what went up on the site.  I just made suggestions, which may or may not have been accepted.

This is the first time I've ever been involved in a crypto project in any way, and even though I had reservations about jumping in (because I'd be putting my reputation at risk by being associated with a gambling website, which is way outside my area of expertise), I figured it was a small role and YOLO, right?  

All that aside, I wish CC the best and do hope they prove the naysayers wrong.  It doesn't look like they're raising a lot of money based on how many chips have been sold, so I'm curious as to how they're going to proceed should they not raise anything close to 7, 8, or 10BTC.

To eddie13's point: at least there are bounty/campaign managers making sure participants get paid.  You might think they're contributing to scams or whatever else, but for the most part they handle large amounts of money and can be trusted not to abscond with it.  If you or anyone else acknowledges that campaigns and bounties are an important part of the crypto economy (and important to the forum itself), then you'd be hard-pressed to argue that we'd be better off without them.

I'm going to make my last comment on the subject, and I'll probably stop using this alt as well.

What is clear is that many of you here know who is behind this alt, and you hide it for a very simple reason: MONEY.

You are involved in one way or another with the project and you know that if you say who is behind it, potential investors will not like it.

The answers I have seen here have made me change my mind about many of you.


Creating an alt to raise 7BTC without saying which disreputable person is behind it doesn't seem like an abuse to you?

Try again: PRIVACY. Until I see a reason not to (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5043497.msg46491017#msg46491017), I respect people's privacy.
You of all people should appreciate that, given that you're hiding behind an alt account. Feel free to PM me who's alt you are, and I'll respect your privacy too.

Poor you.  You remind me of that other nutter Hippie Tech (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=31553;dt) who's also earned just one merit more than you on zero ...

Lol.  Is that the account he used in his ban appeal thread?  I remember making comments there, but for the life of me I cannot recall the name of the account he used, though I recognize the Dic3L0v3r name.

I supported naim027 in that appeal, as I thought he was making decent contributions to the forum--and that was well before I heard about Casino Critique.  He didn't get a lot of supporters, and I understand why his name doesn't immediately instill trust in someone seeing it attached to the project.  But as far as the CC slogan goes, it would be kinda-sorta awkward to write "The brainchild of a group of reputable Bitcointalk members, except for one or two whose trustworthiness is disputed.".

I've stated that I believe that the team behind Casino Critique isn't looking to scam anyone, and I'll hold that belief until I see evidence that suggests otherwise.  I am not, repeat not, giving it my personal seal of approval, as I haven't been a part of the creation of the project aside from making sure the copy on the CC website is legible.  

The team members (I'm assuming) are communicating and planning on Telegram or wherever, and I haven't been privy to any of those communications, so unless I knew what was going on behind the scenes I'd never state with confidence that anyone should invest with them.  On the other hand, I find it unlikely that all of those members are colluding to scam the chip buyers.  There are some I do trust, like Hhampuz for example, and collectively they'd be ruining a bunch of reputations that took a long time to earn if they were doing something untoward, and strictly from a practical viewpoint it doesn't seem like it'd be worth it--unless they did raise 7 or 9BTC or what have you.  Those charity abusers from a while back proved that big sums of bitcoin can be tempting and cause reps to be ruined.

Whatever happened to those guys, anyway?

In any case, I've disclosed my involvement and the extent of my endorsement (which is to weigh the risks vs. the potential profits and is essentially neutral) of CC.  Hopefully if anything bad did go down, people wouldn't think that I profited or that I caused anyone to get scammed.  And seriously, if any members here do think I'm promoting CC or doing something wrong, let it be known and we'll discuss it.  I'm an anonymous username on a discussion forum, so my reputation is all I've got.

There isn't one person behind the Casino Critique project; it's a team, and those team members (aside from the one member writing from the CC official account) are listed on their website.  If you think it's Royse777 behind the Casino Critique forum account and don't trust him, act accordingly.  But also realize that he wouldn't have complete control over any funds the team has, so IMO it's really a moot point.

Oh, wow!  I remember that debacle (though fuzzily) and also that aTriz was fairly trusted prior to his public disgrace and shaming.  However, everything he did he did on his own and not with a team of forum members assembled.  I'll have to go back and re-read that thread to refresh my memory.

I think that few hundred chips should be given for free to various forum members.
This chips are not ''altcoin'' because they are not on any blockchain I think, and I could hardly call this a bribe.

Why don't you simply ''admit'' that you received 1 million dollars in Bitcoin to keep the secret of original Casino Critique owner, and everyone else did the same  :D
Owner must be a very rich man when he could bribe many DT members with so much money...
Real question is who is the real notwhatyouthink, but then you search who had the biggest argument with Royse and you will probably find him easily, he is still obsessed with him.

https://i.imgur.com/Ad9HVwZ.jpg

notwhatyouthink is dead.
long live the notwhatyouthink.

I did not read it because I have him and several of his buddies on ignore and do not have much time for any of them, maybe occasionally temporarily unignoring them here and there to see what they are spouting if it happens to be in a thread that I take an interest.

Of course, that is the best advice and one I would offer to all and have done many times in the past.

For investors to part with 7 BTC on the say-so of that group would be a remarkable achievement. I doubt they will raise anything near it.

As for the chips for sale, it is not easy to understand the actual number after reading the text here in their Terms and Conditions (https://ibco.casinocritique.com/terms-and-conditions/)

Is the number actually 4000?

Yes it is the account he exchanged merits with himself at one time too and he uses the same Dic3L0v3r alt-account when bumping the thread hoping to have the naim027 account banned  ;D

Thankfully they are not using your name on their promotional material. Anyway, you stated clearly what involvement you have and you also have an excellent reputation in the forum and it should stay intact regardless of what the future holds for Casino Critique.

You are an approachable person, I am sure if anybody has any concerns they can contact you in private and you will not hesitate to engage with them regarding whatever it is they might be finding problematic.

Stop lying.  You have me on ignore because I've criticized your abuse of the trust system.  It's all documented in black and white, including your retaliatory exclusion of me in your trust list.  So now you've proven that not only are you thin-skinned, but also dishonest about it.  Not a good look for a DT member, if you ask me.

Surprise surprise... trollybad did the same thing with me just because I criticized him, as if I care... but this just proves he is abusing his Default Troll membership.
I wouldn't be surprised if he was the one who created or initiated bunch of this newbie alt accounts and accusation topics about Casino Critique.
This is his loooong list, it can't even fit one post:
https://loyce.club/trust/2022-09-17_Sat_05.07h/1016855.html

If what you say is true, why is Royse777 not mentioned in their Review and Content Team?

https://i.postimg.cc/7YR1pTJ9/IBCO-2-bitcointalk-Copy.png

Absolutely, though if it concerns problems with Casino Critique itself I don't think I could be of much help.  But I'm going to remain optimistic that there's not going to be any need for that.  I'm also hoping the project turns out to reach some level of success--but I get the feeling that whether that happens or not depends on the team raising enough money to get started, and like I said, judging from the number of chips sold so far there hasn't been much interest.  

I do know that much of what's on the roadmap is vague, and CC's revenue goals are lofty to say the least.  I think if they laid out a concrete plan with details as to how they're going to attract partners, sponsors, advertisers, and whatever else it might make it way more enticing to potential investors.  I think I suggested something like that when I was doing my editing.  The thing is, people have become jaded by all the scam ICO projects that promised everything and delivered nothing that they're reluctant to buy into some profit-sharing program that doesn't have a detailed prospectus, trusted bitcointalk members or not.

Unfortunately, I've got no control or even a say in any of that.  I don't even have experience in gambling or business, just writing, so my role was small and is most likely finished--unless they do launch the review site, need an editor, and decide to reach out to me for assistance with proofreading and such.

I gotta tell you, my impression is that there's no money to get started, much less bribe anyone to keep secrets.

Why would they need this?

After all, they can write whatever they want and declare whatever they want as the Godzilla of the forum!!!
The "so-called" aristocrats of the forum in this way openly create rent for themselves; They can also participate in campaigns from their own sub-accounts as they wish. Who would want to lose this rent?

Especially when we think that the forum is far from its former popularity, they can now do these tactics more easily. I don't know about Royse, but when I read what's written, I get the idea that it's a very clear smear campaign.

The secure tip for cryptocurrency investment is to always do your own research because most people who are victims of scams or dump-and-pump projects rely on influencer statements about projects.
Yes, there are more than 2-3 reputable members of the forum who are involved in the Casino Critique but people still need to be cautious.

If they really had a vision for the website and business they would make it happen even if they raised nothing more than the 0.005 BTC (https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/bc1qy330f4q0fnavnw66lzysrx583ts0the7yyx049xclrs2zq52g87s4fy5xy) that already sits in their balance. I believe that address is theirs.

The real test for the team would be to openly announce who the other members are and then be ready face questions if they are asked. After that, they should be clear with their roadmap. They have not stated exactly who else beyond the 11 names mentioned are involved in the project and in which capacity.

That is the way it is. Scammers made off with phenomenal amounts of money via sham coin and token offerings.

If people are reluctant now it is because applying caution is far better than blindly jumping in. The days of launching an STO, IEO, ICO and other fundraising events to dupe gullible investors are over, the days of tokens and coins being sold to make teams wealthy while investors lost out such as in 2017 and 2018 are over.

You are right, having detailed prospectuses will not help (but nor will having a part-anonymous team).

I wish I had your optimism, but I don't.  The days of gullible investors on Bitcointalk.org might be over, but that's because we've become a bubble of jaded cynics.  All you have to do is look at all the ads on coinmarketcap, twitter, or the plethora of blockchain explorers to see that they're still going strong.  If those ads weren't working, no one would pay to place them there.  The majority of people are not as experienced with these tricks and scams, and still fit the "gullible" description.

Case in point: https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/investors-scramble-to-recoup-money-from-23-year-old-crypto-king-who-allegedly-owes-35-million-1.6078121

This thread of yours will soon die or buried by other threads unless you provide proofs that what you claim is true or correct and he has some help from DT members. To be exact, you are wrong about the part where you stated that DT members are helping to hide him from getting expose of what you claim about the things he did. I am sure that not all DT members are helping because I know some DT members have nothing to do with it. If it turns out to be a scam when their goal in raising 7 BTC as calculated by LoyceV through selling chips then you are free to start a scam accusation. After all, you won't be able to do anything about it unless you spend money like to bring it to the court if you can afford the cost. It is true that a few years back, many projects and even casinos before start a fundraising by selling tokens which in the end, many are scammed because of it.

Judging by the activity of the Bounties (Altcoins) (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=238.0) board, the token spam is still very profitable.

The real problem, in my opinion, is that most "investors" don't care what they're investing in. Ever since 2017 it struck me as weird that the simplest idea tries to raise $100 million, and none of the investors seems to realize that's enough money to buy thousands of luxory cars.

Being anonymous isn't necessarily bad. I'm more or less anonymous, and so are you. Most Mods too, and so is Satoshi. That's fine with me.

I do not know if it is very profitable but it seems to be highly active in that board. If scammers cast a wide net and manage to pull in just one or two victims from thousands of potentials, then it means they will keep doing it in the hope of increasing numbers.

Those days of 2017/2018 are over, only a tiny minority of fundraiser projects will be able to sell coins and tokens to make millions of USD$ for themselves now.

It is fine with me too until the point I invest in a project, at that point I want to know who I am dealing with.

Anonymity does not have to be necessarily bad, I agree with that statement but in the end if investors or potential investors want to know the names of the full team behind his Casino Critique project it should be disclosed. If for some reason they do not want to disclose the names they really should disclose the real reasons why they are refusing to disclose the names of the people behind their project.

I have a different opinion: if investors want something that the other party doesn't want to give, they shouldn't invest.

You are welcome to your view and I am welcome to my mine. Anyway, regardless of the view, that is probably one of the many reasons why they have 0.005 BTC in their address which equates to less than $100 ;D

Are you rushing to invest and in the process add to their 0.005 BTC haul?

I have just one query from OP or anyone else is that lets's suppose Royse777 start a setup for Casino Critique and is raising 10 btc or 100 btc for his start up? What is the problem with it ?
Isn't it everyone's right to raise any money for their project and if anyone is a popular member of bitcointalk doing it, then what is wrong with it?
I just fail to understand the concern here  ???

You will need to realize who is obsessed with Royse to understand the concern.

Who are these following users?
Royse777isCasinoCritique, notwhatyouthink, Zalima Zohair.

Who is the known account behind these unknown usernames? How can anyone describe why all these accounts has a common interest?

---

Let's add some clue.
JollyGood is the only known account who is bitching against Royse all the time. He needed it, after all his campaign against 1xbit was losing traction. Question here: who is going to be his next hunt?

I wasn't criticising anyone's jadedness by any means, believe me.  People have good reason to look on any crypto project with extreme skepticism because of all the BS that went on during the ICO mania and all the crap ideas and outright scams that said mania birthed.  

There's only one member who's choosing to remain anonymous (at least as far as I know), and personally I don't think that's too big a deal since all the money CC collects isn't being held by just one person, and also because there are some reputable members attached to the CC project.  Even if it was just Hhampuz and DireWolfM14 running the show, I'd trust that this isn't some rip-off attempt.  But that's just my opinion, and once again I'm remaining neutral.  My point is that the member who's behind the official CC account isn't of huge importance; the other members obviously trust him/her, and there's an escrow team in place to safeguard the project's funds.

That said, it would be so much better if that person disclosed their identity.  It'd put this discussion to bed at the very least.

Well, that's what it's going to boil down to in any case.  I'm not sure if the small amount that's been raised so far is due to this controversy or not, but I bet it's not helping.

That's true, but by our actions we and others have built up reputations over the years without requiring our identities to be known.  I think you'd agree that a bitcointalk username is associated with a certain reputation, assuming one has been established.  So if you don't even know someone's online identity, you can't gauge how trustworthy they are.

But as I've stated before, aside from the one anonymous member the other team members are known.

Don't be surprised if the next new reputation topic from JollyGood and his alts is something like this:
"All escrow team members are alt of Royse777"

It's possible from the stupidity level of JollyGood.
Months before he was seeing 1xbit to everything, now he is seeing Royse777 in everywhere.

Would it?  I'm not so sure.  There're a lot of personalities in this forum, not everyone is going to like everyone.  Hell, even Switzerland has made some enemies, and he's about the most even-keeled AI human I've encountered on the interwebs.

Besides, I don't think anyone on the CC team is going to disclose their real name.  The only thing these trolls are asking for is a different, anonymous bitcointalk user name.

https://c.tenor.com/KnaDXgxBV2QAAAAM/takes-glasses-off-deal-with-it.gif

I don't know for sure, and I'm not sure how many people are on the fence about investing in CC, with the deciding factor being the single member of the team remaining anonymous.  Now that I'm writing that thought out, it probably doesn't matter too much--but at the very least it'd put this controversy (no matter what its importance) to rest.

No, of course they're not.  But as I said, even without knowing the legal names of the people behind the bitcointalk usernames, those usernames have positive/neutral/negative reputations associated with them.  If this was a project where they said they weren't even naming the team by their bitcointalk usernames, I'm pretty sure there would be no faith that it wouldn't turn out to be a scam (and rightfully so).

The OP should answer this but I probably speak for most when saying in essence every member operating a legitimate project should freely be allowed to try to fundraise.

Maybe the OP was a victim of the Bitlucy/Royse777 scam therefore he is holding grudges or maybe he does not want a scam to take place but I am curious about why he is convinced Royse777 is a hidden member of this particular project. If Royse777 is not connected to this project then the OP is bringing unnecessary attention here but if Royse777 is connected then by all means the OP can raise concerns because after all the Bitlucy/Royse777 scam did occur.

I hope the OP would clarify his position and post using their real account.

You are wrong. I am not using alt-accounts to either discredit you or to keep highlighting the Bitlucy/Royse777 scam.

These are virtually my sentiments exactly.

You mentioned the names, let me comment. I have a lot of time for Hhampuz but lost any little respect I had left for DireWolfM14 some time back. Even if a reputable member was acting as escrow I would dismiss that as a plus-point for a project because he was not part of the team really and controlled no notion of where the project was going, he would just be collecting his commission on escrows.

If there is just one member remaining anonymous and if that member happened to be associated with a scam casino a few months ago in capacity of Partner and Marketing Director and made bold claims putting their own reputation on the line then it is clear nobody especially well respected members should backing the project.

I understand your perspective when you say the name remaining anonymous is not a big deal because an escrow account collects the funds and there are other reputable members who trust the anonymous one. For me it is not enough to either trust the project or believe it will be successful.

That sort of secrecy would not help at all but thus far the balance in their address is still steady at 0.005 BTC, most probably a team member deposited it there.

Though several members have decided to keep the name quiet, that anonymous member seems to have let the cat out of the bag themselves. Thank you for mentioning it was just one member. Hopefully they will attach their username to the project and provide reasons why they wanted to remain in the shadows.

As the days go by, if I see this project releasing notes and there is merit to it I would be a strong backer but right now I see nothing that makes me see this as a potential business.

@JollyGood, I don't need you to respect me.  I have enough self-respect for both of us.

Speaking of self-respect, one lesson I pushed onto my children; self-respect can often be demonstrated by one's ability to take criticism.  ;)

Yawn LOL
How could you deny some data.

Just look at your post history. Last one week how many posts you made and how many of them are related to me. Go and count the numbers.

Look at the number of posts you made in this topic, look at the number of posts you made on the bitlucy withdrawal topic, look at other topics created related to me. Who has the most number of responses?

You are obsessed with me. How could anyone will not suspect that all those alt are not you just to create new conversion when another conversation is dead. You are even talking to yourself just to create conversation. See. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5414027.msg60983710#msg60983710)

All these you are doing to discredit my reputation, you are doing good though. Wherever you are having chance you are not missing it to insult me. Meta, reputation, scam accusation, gambling which board you left untouched? Why wouldn't you? After all I am your new subject after 1xbit.

You are obsessed about me, obsessed to discredit everything I have done and do or will do. Do yourself a favor, before lying check your data to back that come out from pressing your keyboard. Something tells me, in real life you are a frustrated loser living a lonely life.

I have added you back where you belong on my ignore list along with the tiny clique of trolls that chased me for a while before giving up and all because I refused to believe your nonsense related to the Bitlucy/Royse777 scam  ;D

Frightened?
I thought I was in your ignore list from long time including others, what changed in between?

I love my dog, we are good friends and loyal. when sometimes it asks too much attention I fake my anger. It then hides behind the doors and pretends not seeing me. My dog is not coward. It observes me and waits for its time to start playing again.

Having me in the ignore list is another lie from you. You only use the word and use it when you are unable to have a liberal discussion. It's a trick for you when you are running out of your nonsense arguments. You did not have any answer for my last post because the data shows you are a liar. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5414027.msg60996497#msg60996497) So like my dog, you are watching and patiently pretending that you are not seeing the posts until I cool off.

Stop playing your word games in topics/posts related to me from any of your accounts. Whatever you had to say you said it in my trust page. I don't hide behind ignore list excuse so I will find you and response your nonsense accordingly. Coward!

I don't know Royse777 and I don't want to say you are right and Royse777 is wrong or you are wrong and Royse777 is right. What I want to say is that you dare not reveal the sins of others with your real account. From my point of view, you look like a coward.

Oh, I didn't notice Royse777 was already here.
So, You are started responding to him again? What's the point? Do you believe you will be able to satisfy him? If so, You are wrong. TrollyBag is not going to stop. Now, I am a bit suspicious about Casino Critique and TrollyBag. Why do I feel like Mr. JollyBad is behind the project and doing all this drama just to promote the platform and spread it over the forum?

Haha, that's funny, Someday someone will come up with the conclusion that both of them are brothers and doing all this drama to promote their casino :D
I know this is not true because there are better ways to promote the casinos and not by the trolls.
 
Are we going to get to a conclusion on this, or this is going to be a never ending debate forever???

Well, from what it looks, it seems he stopped (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5414027.msg60996636#msg60996636)... for now.

Speaking of all these new accounts creating topics in order to cause some friction and then disappear in a thin air. It's likely Royce777 created some enemy or enemies probably from signature campaigns or bounties as he was a manager. The common thing about these account is they seem to be bitter about campaign managers
1. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5414027.msg60963524#msg60963524
2. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5412164.0

It's not just Royse, but there are members who won't like certain managers for a number of reasons and hence they will launch such posts against them only to satisfy themselves, but the result is always all in vain. Some may have hard feelings about not being accepted and others might have jealousy.

Also, these people use random newbies accounts which shows them that they can't stand their arguments from their original accounts.

It's been a while since I've been in the reputation section, and, in fact, I think I'm going to end up putting it on ignore because I'm a bit fed up with the unnecessary drama, sometimes stirred up by alts. At first I enjoyed coming here more, as it's like the gossip on Bitcointalk, but I'm getting fed up.

I would like to make a reflection that has been going through my mind.

I know what Casino Critique's main account is.

And I think that hiding it in the end has been detrimental, because, in my opinion, that person has a pretty decent reputation, I'd say. Although not perfect. That person sent me a PM telling me about the project and offering me a free chip. I did not promise them that I would not tell who that person is, although I understood that they preferred not to disclose it. I didn't remember anything the PM said about no disclosing and I had to look at the PM again before writing this post to realize that it said:: "...Casino Critique is my official account. Please keep it unpublished."

In my case, I have not disclosed it but not for money or anything else, because I am not involved in the project and I have had little to no relationship with the people involved during my time in the forum. I simply understand that the people on the project prefer not to disclose it, and I respect that.

The only thing I could have been involved in would have been to invest some chips, but it didn't convince me, as it didn't convince almost anyone else. It seems that the project will continue despite the adversity of lack of funding and if it is finally a successful project will be mainly due to persistence, effort and faith in the project that have those who make up the team.

Although I think it would have been better to say who Casino Critique is, I don't think this issue has had any influence on the funding. I think such big numbers on a new project is what people don't see clearly.

I just prefer to improve my financial situation in a boring but safe way: DCA to the S&P 500, DCA Bitcoin and some RE.

Well, in view of recent events (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5416864.msg61116437#msg61116437), I, who did not promise to keep the secret (I was simply asked for) am going to confirm that Royse777 is Casino Critique, which I could prove with the PM, but I don't think it will be necessary.

Yes Royse777 not only helped to keep secret that AnotherAlt was Naim027, a known cheater and plagiarist while evading the ban, but also included him in his Casino Critique project.

Right now I'm hesitating because at the very least I'm going to leave him a neutral negative spirit tag, if not a negative tag directly and I don't care if those of you who are his friends fill me with retaliatory negative feedbacks.

I will think about it in the next few hours.

When I read that post, I assumed he meant his real name, not his other forum accounts:

The one in the project was/is naim027, it was already publicly known he was banned for plagiarism. Only the ban evasion wasn't known to us at that time.

Ifi that happens, you should care and fight to have them removed. Retaliation tags are never acceptable. To be fair: I don't think I've seen retaliation from Royse777 ("or friends") because of negative feedback on Royse777.

No it is not necessary. But I think this was an unnecessary move from you. I was trusting you like I did some others.


For casino critique project we need people who will work there, believe in the project. Why it matters if a user is banned?
When a campaign manager is hiring a participant, what does he consider? He consider user who will follow his rules. He does care less how good a poster is. Have you not seen it from your example.
As a project owner my concern is who will fit to my needs or better say our needs. Naim seemed a good fit who is hardworking, I offered him and he accepted. What does it has to do with someone who is banned forum? The forum is not sponsoring the project or the forum does not have a rules such like a ban user from the forum can not start a bitcoin project or involve in a bitcoin project.

Now about hiding CC from my main account.

1. It's an official account. May be it worth to know who is behind it but should it be mandatory, is a project obliged by some rules that they will have to announce it from their own account? 

2. After bitlucy there were few users including two specific users who are waiting to destroy anything that I will do or take, do you think it was good for the project to announce that CC is the project I am going to start. I simply did not feel secure to do so.

Now since you brought it open, you made my life harder.   

Some people exist in the world who care about privacy. They keep their promises, and Royse777 is not the only one who respects others' privacy. People even hide others' privacy when they know the person is trying to correct his mistakes (Mine was an incorrect way to correct mistakes) if they think he is unlikely to scam others. The world is full of good people; we just don't realize them. Loyce respected others' privacy until he saw a reason to disclose it.



Does it matter to a company to know whether I am banned or not? Suppose they know. Does it matter to them? Should they care about my forum background, or should they care about the other projects that I have done? BTW, I am not on the project for a couple of days now. CC is Supposed to announce that.

Your concern for your privacy is a load of bull. Don't use the term as a shield to hide behind when you are being a prick. People who care about their privacy do not publish their real name, address, phone number or email address on the web for anyone to see. If you are truly concerned about your privacy, then you should be more careful when posting personal information online.

https://i.imgur.com/Zjwyxb7.jpg
Source: http://www.itsnaim.com/#contact



The fact that you were banned from the forum was never a issue, as far as I know. Many members even supported you in your ban appeal thread. It became, however, an issue when it was discovered that you disrespected the community by ban evading and lying about it. Surely you can tell the difference?


Yes, if they knew about your dishonesty, it should have mattered to them. Your forum background is your reputation, and that's kind of important here.  ;)


That's a moot point now.


EDIT: added an archived version of the site
EDIT 2: removed an archived version of the site (everyone can find it on their own)

What is the point of blurring the image while posting the source link? This is a dummy website used as a dummy template, nothing else. The website link was never published anywhere, and I am curious how and where you found it. What did you want to achieve by posting this? A couple of merits?

I am one hundred percent sure the link was never posted before.
Why are you so interested in me? Looking for my personal information and everything else. I already said I am not an Anonymous.


I accept my bad things. I was dishonest about multiple accounts on the forum. What else? Did I scam anyone? Does anyone get any harm due to my lie? Did I lie about anyone else?

Keep your hand over your body and answer if you can. Are you 100% Honest? You never lied?

---

Now I am seriously scared of internet wolves. I didn't care about my security or personal information before. There was a time I used my Facebook status to save my wallet's private keys. That's much dumb I am.

I guess if your last name is "Bitches" you kinda have to name your child like this:

https://meem.link/i/tw9k9qex.png


You might want to take a break. I don't see how digging your hole deeper makes any sense for you now.

As for harm, there was something about bonuses that you tried to double-dip with your sockpuppets. I can't be arsed to look it up, but again - stop digging or someone won't be so lazy.

I badly need a break. I will write some bullshit tomorrow. It's already 1 AM and I can not sleep. It's been a couple of days I cannot sleep. I used to post my photos and my family photos on social media. Why are those fuckers searching for my personal information? How they are related to my forum account? What if they use my family photos to harm me? I didn't kick anyone's balls. There are a lot of scammers and Unethical people on the forum and they making money from it. I didn't scam anybody. I got scammed multiple times. People making fun of me. People taking advantage of my illness.

Yeah, maturity isn't exactly his strong point.

As far as Casino Critique is concerned, naim027's involvement wouldn't matter to me much, even after he was revealed to have those other alt accounts.  It's not the worst offense in the world to have concealed that fact, even though it wasn't honest.  The fact is that he's not the only team member, and he's certainly not running CC (to the best of my knowledge; I've been fooled before).

I'm pissed only because he hid the fact that AnotherAlt and Cryp0Soul were his alts, and he was asking for post history reviews with the naim027 account still appealing a ban.  He made no secret that those two accounts were under his control, but he hid the fact that the naim027 acccount was also his, likely knowing I'd never give merits to either alt if I knew it.

Yeah, that sounds like a sayonara from somebody who knows they're finished on the forum.  They usually write something like that or go out in a fit of rage.

FatFork, you are not allowed to post archive link that has personal information. Knowingly or unknowingly it may harm the person. If you really want to keep the link then everything deserve to be in the investigation board or it should be deleted. I don't know what consequences it will bring for you if you don't delete it, you can not move it to investigation board since you are not the topic creator.

If you are not aware then read this

Did naim ever posted the URL on the forum? If he posted it before then it might be fine but if he did not then you are liable for it to bring it on the forum.

Update:
I reported the post so that mod can take care of it. But I think it's better if you delete it before search engine crawl it and have a cache version. It may already did, we don't know.

Another update:
It's better if you remove the website URL too. It still exists in the clear web which is linked to the forum.

I'm not sure about that because I didn't post his personal information on that website, he did it himself. But I've removed the archived version because it's not relevant to proving my point anyway.


He published his private email address willingly, everything else has already been crawled by spiders since his website was public anyway. That's exactly why I said that his so-called concern for his privacy is a bunch of bullshit.


EDIT:


A website URL is not considered personal information and the content of his website is up to him (his website currently contains no personal information as far as I can see):

When I go to the website I see some inappropriate texts right now but since you archived it or it was archived before, when I go to the archived version I can see there is a picture, phone number with the email address.

One can not find it via the forum only if you remove the URL. The information can be in the clear net which is not a problem but it can not be linked to the forum via public boards. It has to be in the investigation board if it's necessary to have it on the forum.

Funny how he chose the AnotherAlt username and It was right in our faces this whole time

I don't think any sensible DT member would send retaliatory feedback.

Well to be fair, anyone could have been behind an account with that username.  Did any of us have any reason to suspect that it was naim027?  If there was, I sure as hell missed it, though I knew it was Crypt0Soul's alt account.

If there were any DT members who gave Poker Player a neg for negging Royse777 and/or naim027 and his alts, I think they'd be making a mistake by doing so.  Not a big enough mistake to warrant an exclusion from my trust list, but this is a case where there shouldn't be any trust retaliation--Poker Player laid out his reasons, and IMO they're solid enough to justify him leaving a neg.

That said, I have no idea who's on DT these days.  Probably almost everyone posting in this thread, right?

Since Royse777 is CasinoCritique, and CasinoCritique is raising funds, shouldn't CasinoCritique be tagged as well? The people who deal with CasinoCritique have no idea what the history of the holder of that account is. I think it is the duty of other members who know to put the same tags on CasinoCritique that are on Royse777. Then the person dealing with CasinoCritique would decide for themselves upon reading those tags.

It's not like if you create a new account you get a fresh new start like no one knows what your past was.

Edit: Have done so myself and tagged CasinoCritique, with reference to Royse777 account.

Casino Critique is an official account which is representing a business where I am not the only one.
Hack it's worthless to tell you anything. It was my fault that I chose wrong guy to tell the secret who seemed a member I thought I could trust.

My worse nightmare of keeping Casino Critique disconnected from my personal account turned out to be a reality now.

---

There are evidences. But like I said always, I am not going to make the log pubic, I explained my reason too why I can not. There are also members who were shown data in private (since I do not want to bring everything public) that at least should prove that bitlucy and me was not the same person.

Now coming to major roles or minor roles, It was no secret that I always told I was offered 10% that he was promised me but of course it was just promise. There were no written contract or legal things. It was just words. In reality I lost cash out of my pocket, which is no secret.

You did not have to believe my word if some of the people who were involved (worked) in Bitlucy would willingly come and tell about my involvement and role. There were at least 4 to 5 users including Legendary and Hero members who are still around but I never seen them to tell a single word yet. Are they scared that they may have the same reputation issue if they come and tell anything?

At least one or two of them could come here and tell that I and Bitlucy were two different persons and I was offered 10% of the profit that bitlucy will make. They obviously was seeing who was controlling finance and every major things on the website.

Promise, privacy even if that was not confirmed by me to keep or not, matters for me (that's why even after all these insults, disbelieve, trashing - I am still not mentioning any of the names). I was trusting you with Casino Critique keeping hidden but you broke it (yeah you did not promise, I get it).

Should you think anyone else will ever tell you anything that was meant to be private for them. I will not trust you anymore with any confidential information. And I suggest everyone to think twice to do the same.

It's not like I was actively defending AnotherAlt, I was just ignoring and not talking about it. I can act/react/stay silent[1] in anything that I want.
Are you telling I am forced to speak every single incident that is happening on the forum?

We? "you can't be trusted"? Who are these we? There are still a lot of people who trust me for over $0.01*10,000x. Still I am actively single handily holding a bitcoin wallet key for an escrow that I did not ask for, it sounds cheap that I am using it in an argument. Feel free to find it. So when you are saying "we", you are manipulating your logic to fit your desire instead of apologizing of the wrong doing you did by breaking the trust I put in you.

And trusting with the money involved in the CC project?
I still don't understand how would you fail to understand it was a 2 of 3 multisig wallet unless you believe that the two other cosigners have not earned a name yet to listen whatever I tell them.

Hire naim for project when he is banned from the forum?
Should I not hire people who will work hard for the project even knowing that they are not getting paid for the work until the project makes money.
Start a project with zero fund in hand. Then you will realize how hard it is.

I PMed over 10 users to be the cosigner of the escrow once two of the escrow told they can not continue for their busy schedule. All of them denied more or less for the same reason. One was going extra mile saying he does not think he can do it considering the reputation/mess, in other words he sounded he was not feeling secure because it may effect his reputation. He was also saying we can not raise the money we are expecting so there is no value in it for him.

You see, when you have money everyone will do everything for you but when you don't have it then no one will take risk, very few will be same like minded as you and will be willing to work.
I have contacted a lot of users to be in the project but when they learn they will not get paid until we make a revenue then they back up. Yeah we are lucky in the way we got few people who are currently in the team and believe in the project. If they were not in the project then it would have been impossible to bring it live (technically we are still working to bring it live).

[1]. I do not want to specifically point it since none of you may not notice, it's better to keep it that way. I noticed similar example of being silent from another user (well not just a user but far more than a user). Everyone has their right to stay silent in any incident if they chose to.

It's really sad to see people getting caught red-handed doing something shady and continuing to argue it on "procedural" grounds. It doesn't matter how offended or betrayed you feel, Royse777. Not in this context anyway.

I don't understand the logic of not disclosing your sockpuppeting to people involved in the project but disclosing it to outsiders, if I correctly understand what's happening here. Regardless of how it leaked, I'd be pissed if I had any dealings with CC and didn't know that you were CC.

Now it sounds that you're not regretting your own behavior but the fact that you got caught, which is what scammers tend to do.

Pardon if I am confused now. Are you telling the CC team members and former escrow team did not know who is forum account Casino Critique?
If that's you got then you have wrong information.
All core team members and former escrow team members know Casino Critique is me.

In addition to, there are some other known forum members (I felt comfortable to disclose) to whom I offered free chips or other to whom I was reaching out to assemble the team - I told them who casino critique is and why I am hiding it from public. One of them were Poker Player too, I trusted him to keep it in PM and hidden from public.

Update:
I just noticed Poker Player, you left negative feedback to Casino Critique account too.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=3490051
Casino Critique is not a personal account but an official account which represent the project CasinoCritique.com. The project consists of other 5 forum members. How it's appropriate to leave a red feedback because of whatever reputation I managed to have?

Who are all those who knew it?

I do not have words to answer you. You are one of those who supported my ban appeal. I appreciate it. I had very little interaction with you, and You knew about my post quality and ability to build a reputation. That was the only reason why you supported my ban appeal. With the naim027 account, I never asked for a post review. I guess you agree with that.

I want to mention again that none of my accounts were created after I got banned. My account was active before I got banned. I asked you via PM if you allow post reviews for alt accounts. Yes, I tried to escape with not banned AnotherAlt and Cryptosoul accounts. That was my wrong move.

Before that, The community had already proved me a liar and speculated a lot of things about me. There was a time when I was thinking of telling the community those were my alts, but I ended up evading the ban. I don't want to mention the username, but I am telling you that people offered me another account to continue on the forum (Evading the ban) via PM. I didn't accept the offer, but it encouraged me to continue with my existing accounts. There was another story about why I sent eight merits to the Dic3l0v3r account. A Legendary member was offering me a merit exchange. I did that with him and thought, why not do it with my alt. After a week or so, I saw it was not allowed. 

I don't want to ruin their reputation just because my reputation was ruined. But if you promise me privacy security, I can give you my account credentials, and you can check those PMs yourself.

I was a noob guy and learned everything from this community. This community made me like this. I was not smart enough to understand what I should allow or not. But things happen.

---

Is it was on the forum? On which post? Help me quote the post, please.

Let me not name there names but put the links. I hope they would see the situation I am in which is forcing me to bring their profiles without asking their permission. Please don't see it unnecessary, please forgive me. I am totally lost.

Okay since you asked:

Former escrow team members:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=881377
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2003859

Team members:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1139993
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=131333
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=325028
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2344286
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=146583
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2473857
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=205954
And few more who left the team or removed for various reasons including https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1187984

Users (except one or two, like I said only those who I thought I am comfortable to disclose) on this spreadsheet who was offered free chips:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1FEo0vBAyBOE5ZFDu9Z-LmOtc7iy2UKXETl878Ydj51c/edit?usp=sharing

There are also many others who are offered to join partnership and or done some work for the project to get paid / or have promised to get paid.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1052091
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=300014
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=487418

And many more users, I do not have a list in hand and I can not remember all of them.

If I reached out to them from Casino Critique account then I told them I am Royse777, if I reached out to them from my personal account then I said Casino Critique is the official account. In every case I told them why I don't want to disclose it in public. None of them seems to be pissed. Some of them even suggested me it's better to do considering the situation I am in after bitlucy scam and some over interested users to reacting in that.

---

Too all of you guys (team members and free chip holders). It feels to me I am using all your names to defend myself. If this was only about Royse777 then I would not care, but since Poker Player tagged our official account I have no other way but to use everything in my hand to protect it. Again please forgive me.

Then I'm totally confused now why this was such a big deal with 5 pages of cover up. How could you possibly not have seen that trying to keep a secret that was impossible to keep (given the number of people involved) would backfire and make you look like you're scheming something fishy.

This will be my last response to any topic related to my personal account, the bitlucy scam where I barely had any control, my lost reputation, requesting everyone to remove me from trust list including everything else that is happening because of me and why I kept Casino Critique official account disconnected from my personal account. I decided to shake the peace and stop defending everything that is coming towards my way. I told the CC team that after today I am going to start fresh again.

Please note: There are very few forum members still exists who are trying to make this place better, genuinely working for it. If you feel it from the heart that you are one of the very few then please do not get offended. Whatever I am saying are from my personal experience for the record. I don't expect anything to change from it. But since I will not talk about all these anymore, I want to tell my last words which are relevant.

Why I requested everyone to remove me from their trust list?
I lost faith from the trust system, I am sorry. It became a meaningless system to me. Trustlist has became a powerful tool for members to manipulate the trust system in their favor. They do not judge others feedback leaving accuracy at all. They do not care about the outcome for other of their wrong choices.

People are leaving negative feedback
- Just because one chosen to stay silent in a matter (My silence in Naim's ban evasion),
- Keep confidential conversation in private because they respect privacy and decides to keep promise.
- They demands why a project have a member who was banned. (An independent project decides who they will hire or partner with as long as not a threat to lose money).
- A new service who do not want to settle with an escrow (Best Change case)
- Demands to make private information public even when it was shared with handful trusted members
- Continue leaving retaliatory feedback but others just ignore and decides to move on.

People are leaving positive feedback
- To impress high rank members to climb the reputation ladder.
- To impress their employers
- They want to have the person in their favour because the person is too arrogant and complected to handle

People are leaving neutral feedback
- They know leaving a negative will look them too bad

People seeking positive feedback:
- By taking loans
- Busting scams as it's a profession
- Hunting alts same as it's a profession
- Constantly policing to make a name

Members are doing all sorts of unethical practice (very less people are doing it from moral obligation) for their personal benefit and satisfaction just to build up a great reputation. Then they are pitching these reputation to advertisers to hire them.
Again these are my personal observations. If I would give this post more time then I could have write more but anyway.

Bitlucy and my lost reputation
I had no control over any finance and independent decision making in bitlucy. It was not my project, I was offered 10% of the revenue. There were no contract, no legal documents (I was promised but there I made one mistake that I never should have done in my entire life, I can only regret it) but some verbal promise. My trust, my honesty, my loyalty was used so badly that even I lost over $6.2k from my own pocket plus 14 to 16 hours of works for two to three long months without having offs (one or two days I took I guess). But many people don't believe it, some people are even over interested and blaming everything on me. It made them pissed because I did not share conversation log, blockchain evidences (I can't remember if I did it in public) in public. I did not share in public because it could insecure my privacy, but they kept demanding it.

What hurt me the most that none of the people from the bitlucy team who worked with me from the forum (Including Legendary and hero members) thought to say a word that bitlucy was not my project and I did not have major decision making role. But anyway, I respect others privacy and the decision they choose to take, they decided whatever they thought was good for them. Maybe they are scared to back me publicly, in case they also discover reputation crisis like me.

Why I decided to keep casino critique official account disconnected from my personal account in public?
After bitlucy scam, I gone through mental trauma. Losing savings, defending reputation eventually losing it, major clash with two over interested forum members - everything was too much to take. At some point I realized whatever I do, they will hunt to destroy me. I was in depression because I was too attached with everything related to save the forum reputation. I was too depressed that I had to consult with doctor and was taking treatments. I lost business, lost savings, lost the respect from the community - all were not easy to deal with especially when this place is a part of my daily life and mental emotion.

In the mean time, I was looking for something. Then the idea of Casino Critique born. But with the ruined situation of my personal account especially not wanting to deal with the two specific members anymore, I decided to keep it disconnected from my personal account so that I can focus on the project only.

I was successfully working until someone decided to create this topic. But they failed anyway, since I was ignoring to response trolls. Everything was going as planned until Poker Player decided to break the trust that I had for him. He felt himself so important that even knowing the reason, even knowing all other members who know who I am but respecting my private request - he decided to disclose it.

Basically it's my fault that I picked wrong guy who was too sick to take this chance to get some attention. He was seeking for it from the last few days, that's another topic to talk anyway. Truth is the reason I trusted him because he successfully created an image around him of trusting him but it turns out trusting poker player with nondisclosure information is a wrong choice.

Again, since I will not have any contribution in the related topics, anyone who tells anything after this post, is not going to get any response from me. It's not that I am ignoring you, or don't want to response to clear anything that you want to know, it's because I need peace, I want to stay mentally healthy.

I am working on to shake the peace and going to give my 100% focus in casinocritique.com. I am proud to have a lovely team, they are backing me mentally. I don't want to let them down. Our hustle will end once Casino Critique will be one of the leaders in crypto casino industry.

Cheers,

I appreciate you read the last long post, I don't expect you to read everything from this too. Here is the straight answer of your simple question.
"...with the ruined situation of my personal account especially not wanting to deal with the two specific members anymore, I decided to keep it disconnected from my personal account so that I could focus on the project only. "

For someone that was caught in some shaddy deal with the devil and hot yo see the light only after the devil had robbed her of her time, money and reputation, I think the person still deserves a second chance to life on the things he loves. I think Royse777 has done her bit of explaining and having her confidentiality in a few with hopes of rebuilding a lost reputation could be given a benefit of the doubt, looking at the other many reputable members involved.
Most of what the cryptocurrency is about revolves around trust and privacy, with confidentiality not making much sense to us, where then do we stand in issues of privacy.

One who suspects something shaddy has got to speak up anyways but I can't help but have a soft core for Royse777.

I understand this as the initial motivation. I don't understand the cover up when you got outed. That was the time to say "yep, it's me, not really a secret because many more users know this" and move on. You knew at that point that this secret has no chance so what was the plan?

And yes, I misunderstood the posts of some other users earlier in the thread... I thought they were saying "we know who CC is and it's not Royse777" but actually they were just playing along with your charade. So you didn't deceive them as I initially thought. You just deceived everyone else.


Well, see above. According to Royse777, everything and everyone is wrong except Royse777. Benefit of the doubt usually comes with remorse and humility, which is severely lacking here.

Anyway, let's backtrack a little bit. If I was considering investing in whatever this CC project is I would surely want to know who is involved in it. Wouldn't you? So we could find a lot of reputable members linked to it but one important member was hiding. That's kinda sketchy in its own right. Then it turns out it's Royse777, recently involved in a scammy casino. I would consider this whole scheme very dishonest and deceptive.

And that's me - someone who didn't really consider Royse777 guilty in the BitLucy debacle. Now imagine if someone thinks Royse777 is a scammer and they get deceived by the presence of all these reputable members in the CC project and put their money into it, only to find out that a scammer (in their view) is involved and said reputable members hid that information.

I don't think that's right. I don't think that's how you rebuild reputation. I think being honest is how you rebuild reputation.

I might be wrong though. Maybe sockpuppeting and lying about it and blaming others is the Bitcointalk way.

Exactly. You exposed your email address with your alt account Crypt0S0ul, as already noted in your "Welcome back again!" topic:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5416864.msg61108552#msg61108552

Marlboroza tried that (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5108783.0), it didn't work (https://loyce.club/trust/2022-10-15_Sat_05.06h/787736.html). Many people are unhappy with the Trust system, but in my opinion you can't fix a decentralized system by making it less decentralized. If the wrong people abandon the system, it gets worse, not better.

With each additional person who knows a secret, the chance of it leaking increases. Eventually, it becomes inevitable. I think Poker Player has a point here:
There's a difference between being told a secret with the request to keep it a secret, and promising to keep it a secret before you're told said secret.

That sucks :( Give it time, give it some distance.

FWIW: Royse777: I still stand by this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5403679.msg60421775#msg60421775):

Agreed. Mistakes were made, even if they were unintentional. But from there, it could have been handled better with more openness.

Why are we still babbling about this debunked accusation 3 months later?

And how can we be sure that the OP isn't yet another naim027 alt (thus this entire thread would just be a gigantic troll-fest)?

---

Just in case it's not clear - Read the 3rd reply after this post.

That was my initial impression too but it turns out that at least part of it is true.

Royse777, I will give you a well-intentioned criticism.
starting from the fact that everything is exactly as you claim, when we talk about the Bitlucy case, your biggest mistake is that you waited for the matter to culminate and to publicly present the problem to them. so you were uncertain and indecisive, which caused the justified suspicion of the other members.

I completely understand opening a new CC account, partly because of the shaken trust in your name and you did not want the new project to be burdened with it from the beginning. But, again at some point when the discussion started about whether you are really behind the CC account, you were indecisive and didn't end the whole thing and tell the truth. Although it was obvious that many members already knew the real identity behind CC, it was a matter of time before it would become public.
So in just a few months, you make the same mistake twice. You certainly don't need anything to blame anyone who presented the confirmation that you are behind the CC account, negative image about everything is only your fault.

I'm still not sure why you insisted on raising funds for the project CasinoCritique (I already asked about that (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5407987.msg60758649#msg60758649) ). you were looking for money for wages for the work you will do on your project, this still sounds strange to me.

Unfortunately, after this drama and things about the team member naim027, you start the whole project from a much weaker position rather than if you just introduced him as Royse777 and possibly asked for help in promotion (or whatever), which will be paid when the project starts to bring in profit.

You're right - I didn't read the most recent reply from Royse.

Just giving my $0.02 once again, but I still don't think Royse777 or any of the CC team members are or were trying to scam anyone.  I was pissed that Royse777 tried to silence criticism from yahoo62278, but other than that I don't have any issues with him.  

Regardless of him concealing his true identity with respect to the CC project, there's still the fact that he's only one member and the funds are protected by their escrow system (to the best of my knowledge).  Naim027's involvement was known right from the beginning, too.

You're right about that, and though I understand why Royse777 wanted to hide his identity I kind of figured it would be revealed one way or another.  Members here are justifiably suspicious, tenacious, and aren't stupid.  There's not a lot that can be hidden for long if they start digging.

I haven't read the whole bitlucy drama in excruciating detail, but my impression from the start is that Royse777 never scammed anyone.  If he was guilty of anything, it was making some wrong decisions based on his judgement of the information he had--and kept getting--at the time.  I gave him the benefit of the doubt, because I'm not sure how I would have acted in his shoes, and we all know hindsight is 20/20. 

Debunked NotATether? I can't believe you would say that coming from a quality poster like you. I think you are blinded by personal empathy.

Well, you're forcing me to do something I didn't think was necessary.

Gift Chip for Poker Player
« Sent to: Poker Player on: September 08, 2022, 11:56:27 AM »
« You have forwarded or responded to this message. »



https://i.ibb.co/CBNbbB9/Screenshot-2022-10-17-at-17-30-42-Personal-Messages-Index.png (https://ibb.co/rkTxxkp)

I'm done with dramas. You won't see much of me in this section. I have done what the voice of my conscience tells me is the right thing to do, and I am not going to enter into endless discussions about my tag and my motives.

Just maybe... Here's one who at least asks some honest questions, but on the other hand if you think you have a duty to make it better, you have tools that you can use such as red tagging someone for what red tagging is meant to be. If you want to check a counter example of what a good use of a red tag is, you just have to check my profile for the red tag you left me  ;D

Get a grip on yourself, I already wrote that I didn't see his last post.

EDIT:

I rarely check on Reputation threads, because I have neither time nor interest in mudslinging. The last time I checked on this thread was sometime in early October. I guess you can figure out why, because nearly all the posts up to this point have been just flame wars between DT members, and with both a job & a nonprofit to attend to, I categorically ignored the whole conversation.

So it shouldn't come as a surprise even when the mic is dropped, I may not see it, especially when the the thread is pages deep in arguments and personal attacks.

PS. I was ready to invest 0.04 BTC with Casino Critique. I probably would not have had the confidence in doing so had I known that it was Royse777 raising the money, with him being fresh off the heels of the BitLucy snafu and all, with him saying he needs some time to cool down from it.

I already got a grip but after that, suchmoon has said that
And you have agreed. I have put the quote and the screenshot so you can see that it is 100% true.


Well, I hope you agree with me that I was right to reveal the secret. And it was a bit by chance, because for the same reason you say, I had put the Reputation section on ignore, and when a thread was moved here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5417172.0), I unignored the section because I was interested in following it.

Then I saw what had happened with that disgusting being called naim027, AnotherAlt, whatever scumbag and that's what triggered me to reveal the secret and I red tagged Royse777 and CC.

 
You better not blame others for what you brought on yourself. The little funding you got is not my fault, and as suchmoon says, telling so many people to keep a secret about you, makes it quite likely to be revealed.

What I don't understand is what kind of trust you had in me. We hadn't exchanged a single PM before you offered me the chip, and we had barely interacted in threads either. Too long I kept it a secret for the little relationship we had.

@Poker Player

All cool man.

The only mystery after this is, how did a serial alt farmer manage to ascertain what people thought was just speculation?   :o

And why was naim027 (masquerading as AnotherAlt) meddling in the affair if being on the team, he already knew who was behind CC?

Something stinks in here.

Naim027 was a part of the Casino Critique team and likely just trying to stick up for the team even though he would have been better off to stay out of it.

This is not about you. Nor do you have any standing to lecture about the trust system.

Wasn't he celebrating comeback in forum just a few days ago?  :D
Maybe he should add more information on his graphic designer portfolio, adding multitasking and ability to operate multiple forum accounts and pretend they are not connected.

Dude I don't understand why you care so much about this guy and his personal information than about your connection with him.
I know doxing is bad and not allowed in forum, but Naim basically exposed himself and dig his own grave, for all of his (known) accounts.
Regarding your connection with Casino Critique account, you made a mistake of hiding this information from public but you revealed it to some members and I don't understand why.
You can't expect everyone to keep your secret and be angry on them for exposing it  :P

He was probably doing some design work for Casino Critique, but he has a big mouth and he is not very smart.

Mental illness or some other hidden motives maybe...
Why is he not banned again for Ban evasion with all his alt accounts?

If you had a hunch - or better yet proof - about naim027's sockpuppeting, ban evasion, lies, etc then you should have made your trust rating about that and it could be perhaps useful to someone. Red trust for being banned is useless. And deleting/reposting your rating is borderline spam.

I'm trying to understand this part of the whole debacle--obviously naim027 was evading a ban with his alt accounts, but what was the meddling he was doing with the AnotherAlt account?  I don't have a photographic memory of all the details like some of you seem to, and though I'll go back and look at the CC thread(s), I'm hoping someone can give me a TL;DR on that.

And I'm also thinking that in light of the new information that's come out, i.e., that naim027 was blatantly ban evading with two alt accounts, that the mods ought to reconsider their decision to unban him.  That might be a wee bit off-topic, so I'll just leave it at that.

A better question is "Who was gullible enough to UNban them in the first place? - (and by extension who supported their unbanning?)"

That info is public - just go to his ban appeal thread.

Then it's about you. If you say "Maybe sockpuppeting and lying about it and blaming others is the Bitcointalk way", then what are you, are you not a "reputable" Bitcointalk member as well, like Royse777?

It's not about me either. And the longer you act like a trust system troll, the longer my red tag will stay on you.

Edit: grammar.

You're quoting me, but you didn't answer the question.

Wow I wasn’t visiting this board for quite some time and you know what?

It delivered.

Reading it page by page and it is worth every second I have spent here.

Oath breakers, fallen angels, back stabbers, anonymous executioners, negative trust ratings going in every direction like firing a machine gun…

This is the bitcointalk I remember.

Only Lauda is missing in this picture…somehow :/

I can't stand it when statements like the above are made, because they always leave me wondering whether I'm being included in that broad set.  I didn't break any oaths, nor do I think I stabbed anyone in any part of their body.  Maybe I'm just one of those soldiers in a foxhole sniping here and there but generally just trying not to get in the war all the way.

Assume (correctly) that I'm stupid.  Did naim027 get his ban reinstated?

And I hope he is not referring to me, for I did not break any oath.

Actually, now that some time has passed, I think that hiding who was behind Casino Critique was wrong, and there were many of us who knew it.

People like NotATether, who said:


had the right to know.

I agreed to withhold the mysterious, unknown person's identity (while there was a whirlwind of speculation that he was Royse777 and nobody in second place as far as possible contenders) for a number of reasons--but I'd say the main one was my own judgement of Royse777 and his credibility.  I definitely wouldn't have agreed to do that for just anyone.  There was also the structure of the funding, and escrows were in place to keep everyone honest.  In addition, even if Royse777 came up with the project idea and kicked it off, there was still a fairly large team working on Casino Critique, so I didn't see this would be in any way a golden opportunity for Royse777 to scam anyone, even if he were so inclined to do it.

Looking ahead, if a situation like that ever comes up again, I'm going to give it a lot more consideration.

The problem, particularly in this case, is that when you agree to something like that and the info leaks out (which it was guaranteed to leak out because Royse777 was apparently telling about it to "many" users) you are in a position of either having to lie covering up the leak, or to break the promise of keeping the secret. And you can't really keep a secret on this forum if more than a few people know about it, what with the pervasive sockpuppeting and backstabbing culture.

Having said that, I can imagine myself getting roped into a situation like this. It's easy for me to talk about this now from the comfort of my glass house.

How many would have any confidence in investing in anything related to Royse777 when almost zero time was given between the Bitlucy/Royse777 scam ending and Casino Critique starting up? You were right to be cautious.

The excuse provided by Royse777 for the massive cloud of secrecy surrounding the main protagonist behind Casino Critique was that two unnamed members (but heavily hinted at them being yahoo62278 and myself) would not allow the project to be given a fair chance to succeed had it be known Royse777 was behind it or involved in it. It was an excuse.

Yes of course you were right to reveal the so-called secret.

Royse777 knew naim027 had alt-accounts that were being to used to push two agendas. First to try to get the naim027 account unbanned and second to push the Royse777/Casino Critique propaganda and whether there is any case to even conclude a 1% chance she was unaware, it cannot detract from the point that the so-called secret was something you were caught unexpectedly to receive without you making any commitment or promise.

If Royse777 is not going to blame you and several others for everything that she did wrong and everything that went wrong, who else will she blame? Did she whole-heartedly even accept her part in the Bitlucy debacle? Royse777 will not be accept responsibility for her mistakes, she had ample time to do so but opted to the contrary.

Allow me to provide some clarity, the primary reason why you were included in the small list of users that received the PM inviting you to receive freebie tokens and being instructed to keep the secret quiet. In the Royse777/Bitlucy scam and reputation threads, some of your posts could have been interpreted as being opposed to me or my views. In some of your posts you (rightly or wrongly) came across as though you were in favour of giving Royse777 a fresh start and minimising her input in the scam whereas I and several others were against it and wanted Royse777 to be fully held to account for her part in the Royse777/Bitlucy scam.

It was clear you were not trolling me as three low-level nonsense posting trolls were at the time (and they have been doing so intermittently since then) but the impression Royse777 probably got was you were against me and thus you were a staunch defender for her reputation. That is my most probable conclusion.

If a situation like that happens again, your consideration could have an impact on others including investors as well as your own reputation. It was a careless act on part of Royse777 dragging others in to her secret by forcing it in front of them in the form of a PM.

The correct format should have allowed you and others to have the right to make a choice about wanting to know a secret with a promise to not divulge it rather than receive a PM stating you have to keep a secret without you even wanting to know about it.

Note:

I haven't been following this thread line-by-line over the last few weeks.


Makes me wonder what the connection between Royse777 and naim027 is ??

Are they alts as well?  Both deleted their DT trust/distrust lists this same week.

---

---

No.  None are banned with AnotherAlt online not that long ago.

I don't think so.

They both got hit by the same shitstorm.

AnotherAlt, Crypt0S0ul, naim027, Dic3L0v3r are known to be operated by the same puppeteer, that much has been ascertained but it seems there could be more accounts which remain unknown as of yet. Eventually he will let it slip.

As for you asking if Royse777 and naim027 are alt-accounts, that would be a huge surprise and highly unlikely scenario because they are most probably not but what cannot be denied is that naim027 was using his AnotherAlt sock-puppet account to promote the pro-Royse777 propaganda in the Bitlucy/Royse777 scam accusation threads.

I think that's only part of it.

First of all, offering something for free is a good business strategy to stimulate sales. After the free chip offer, I was looking at the project and thinking whether to invest something. If I had, it would have been an amount I didn't mind losing, on the order of $100. But I didn't see the point. It is not the first time that I have been presented with a business project with big numbers, very well detailed, that in the end comes to nothing.

I guess it included those of us who initially supported the flag and/or left neutral feedback and then changed the feedback to neutral and withdrew support for the flag.
But I like to think of myself as having independence. It's not either you're with me or you're against me. Each case, taking into account the evidence presented, may lead me to one course of action or another. And for me, knowing that she had covered up for Naim027 was the straw that broke the camel's back. It made me rethink everything.

Also, there are some things that I'm becoming aware of. For example, there is supposed to be some competition between Royse777 and yahoo62278 for the management of signature campaigns.

But then I see that efialtis, who took a long time to red tag Royse777, despite saying clearly from the beginning that Bitlucy smelled like an exit scam, has a business that is the same that Casino Critique is trying to implement. Coincidence? I don't think so. And I'm not saying that for efialtis, who I think was sincere with the tag.

In my case I neither compete for signature campaing management nor will I start any business project in the forum (never say never ever but certainly not in the short or medium term).

At this moment I count 4 negative feedbacks to her, because the one from yahoo62278 even though it is neutral colored is clearly negative in my opinion.

naim027 is a member of the Casino Critique team gathered by Royse777, it is the connection between them. The problem is that at some point he was banned from the forum and there was additional doubt about the whole project (CC), and therefore about Royse777.


I noticed several of you persistently repeating yahoo62278's conflict with Royse777 as a conflict of interest and competition. I don't understand why, because those two aren't the only campaign managers here.


I think Royse777 is not "she" but he.

yahoo62278 was accused of having it, and of having "taken away" some campaign, I think in Bitlucy's thread. What is clear is that I do not have a conflict of interest, and, on the other hand, did the other campaign managers, tag Royse777?

I think yahoo62278 was honest when tagging and wasn't trying to take advantage.


Whatever.


At a time in history when many people consider saying that boys have penises and girls have vaginas to be fascist on the level of Mussolini, using he or she I don't think is very relevant to what we are discussing.

At the time of his ban from the forum on May 19th, naim027 had already been hired by Royse777 as support staff for BitLucy casino. Following the BitLucy fiasco, they continued to work together on Casino Critique project. The fact that naim027's account was banned wasn't a real problem for the CC project, since it was a known fact from the start. Although some members (including you) voiced their concerns (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5409868.msg60763300#msg60763300), the issue was soon dropped and never brought up again.

Please do not spread new kind of misinformation. naim027 never worked in Bitlucy team. He was interviewed but was not hired as at that time there were enough members in the team.

I apologize if I'm spreading misinformation, but it's hard to tell who's telling the truth and who's lying these days.

My conclusion was based on the following quote:



From the conversation, you suggested to yahoo62278: "At least ask some of the users who worked with the owner.", to which naim027 (with his alt account) replied: "I guess I can help a little bit..." Additionally, the screenshots (if authentic) indicate that you offered naim027 a job and defined the salary for Bitlucy casino support staff. After being interviewed by the "Bitlucy CEO", naim027 informed you in a private conversation that he had decided to accept the position.

As far as I know, that's all the information available, so I hope you can see how I arrived at that conclusion. But hey! You should already know that I am always open to constructive criticism. If you think I made a wrong conclusion, please feel free to correct me and provide supporting evidence.

If you are familiar with Telegram group then you will understand it's a group conversation. In the group there were me, Naim, and Lucy. The temp name for the group was "Rec 2" as the short for the word "Recruiting". It was given number "2" as there were many other groups (temp groups) for individual possible applicants.

As for who to believe and who not to, I gave it up already, these days I do not care much. I am keeping myself away from all these because none of it really works. End of the day people make their own conclusions, take it as guaranteed then advise/suggest/give opinions to everyone. Everyone is a package of judge, jury, prosecutor - an entire law making agency.

My weakness that I am still looking at the interesting analogies from different members, I should not even want to correct you in the first place. It's obviously a lot for me to take and I am still working on it.

Casino Critique was never going to succeed if it involved Royse777 and naim027 regardless of whether they presented large numbers or not. If these types of characters were involved in any project the chances of it succeeding are extremely low no matter how many large numbers they pluck out of the air when trying to seek attention or promote their ideas or when seeking investment.

The first shroud of secrecy was Royse777 hiding her involvement in the Casino Critique project. The second shroud of secrecy was when Royse777 covered up for naim027 and associated alt-accounts.

That was a fairly low-level thing to do but she probably needed support and regular back up from any user apart from the three trolls that formed a clique and gave her unnecessary widespread boost for reasons not warranted. His AnotherAlt account trolled me for a while in support of Royse777 before giving up.

For me what stood out was incompetence and gross negligence in the way she conducted herself throughout the Bitlucy scam therefore I had to give Royse777 negative trust. I 100% agree with the feedback you left her, I would also not trust Royse777 even for $0.01 deals.

I thought campaign managers were in most part generally respectful towards one another and there was not much friction between them. Just look at the manner in which yahoo62278 has conducted himself throughout this process, not one person can say he has been harsh with Royse777 on the contrary he has been exemplary and somewhat generous towards her considering the failings on part of Royse777.

I do think on several occasions Royse777 has attacked those questioning her conduct (myself and yahoo62278 were included) and with that aggressive stance and anger issues she failed to compose herself and articulate herself in a more acceptable manner. Her own conduct did herself no favours at all.

I understand why you came to this conclusion because, in those screenshots, everything was almost ready to go.

I also mentioned that;


Later Royse said it was he who deleted the recruitment group. I am still working at my current place.
I had a conversation with my current employer about bitlucy job offer, but later they didn't hire me. So, I didn't leave my current job and I am still doing my previous (current) job.

---

I still believe JollyFuck, AKA TrollyBag becomes a ghost hunter lately.
if you have nothing to do other than this, go and tag more 1xcraps so that you can get some joy. After all, you do it with passion.

==========
https://i.postimg.cc/4NjP6Dfz/naim027-untrustworthy-compulsive-liar-Copy.png


https://i.postimg.cc/Y0RKPQRw/naim027-untrustworthy-compulsive-liar-3-Copy.png
==========



Wearing a bitcoincleanup.com signature and avatar will not portray a multiple level compulsive liar such as AnotherAlt, Crypt0S0ul, naim027 and Dic3L0v3r in a good light (and those are just his known alt-accounts). Even one of the low-level trolls that is part of a tiny clique and had earlier supported him in the Bitlucy/Royse777 scam threads has left a negative tag for him  ::)

What cannot be denied is that Casino Critique took on naim027 as a team member while his account was banned, we all knew that as it was open information but only a select few were told Royse777 was behind Casino Critique therefore nobody outside that circle has the opportunity to question her about that disastrous decision.

Furthermore, Royse777 also knew that the AnotherAlt account was being operated by naim027 thus kept quiet about a ban evader. At that point the aptly named Dic3L0v3r account was known as the only alt-account naim027 operated. First the Bitlucy/Royse777 scam and then after that is this Casino Critique debacle including her dalliance with AnotherAlt, Crypt0S0ul, naim027 and Dic3L0v3r. The reputation of Royse777 is in tatters.

If the Casino Critique episode had not taken place I suppose I would have said to give it time and maybe she could rebuild her reputation but looking at the bigger picture now it will take a lot more and even then some of the red tags might never be revised.

Before you jump the gun too quickly, you should remember that Casino Critique did not scam anyone so it is inaccurate to say that Royse777's association with it adversely affects his reputation.

Wait until his fire goes out, and let's talk about that later... after witches sin was purged and cleaned by flames.

https://i.imgur.com/l10nyl0.jpg

Please correct me if I am wrong but it seems as though you contradicted yourself with a statement you made on 17th October 2022: PS. I was ready to invest 0.04 BTC with Casino Critique. I probably would not have had the confidence in doing so had I known that it was Royse777 raising the money, with him being fresh off the heels of the BitLucy snafu and all, with him saying he needs some time to cool down from it. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5414027.msg61137271#msg61137271)

For what it is worth, I agree with you. Casino Critique did not scam anybody but just like you if I were on the verge of investing 0.04 BTC in a project, I would avoid investing in one that had Royse777 involved in it. By simply having Royse777 associated with any project would send out warning signals and alarm bells ringing to avoid it.

Yes, I did write that. No, it is not a contradiction. I wanted Royse to get some time to cool down before working on another gambling project, but he didn't take any break - it would've been better for him. That does not mean he was going to run off with investors money though - he refunded the only investment (0.005BTC) that was sent to him as soon as he announced the escrow structure was going to change.

I wouldn't go so far to say that any project Royse777 was associated with was doomed to fail myself. I think NotATether is correct in saying Royse should have exhibited a cooldown period. Jumping from 1 failure straight into another project and hiding multiple facts showed me that Royse was not to be trusted. No, they didn't scam and with escrows in place I don't think scamming was possible (unless an escrow was talked into scamming, which is Ludacris due to both being pretty stand-up guys in the community), but if money was collected it would have been collected under false pretenses. It just seemed to go from a boo-hoo I got scammed by this guy to moving into a new project smeared in lies and deception. With a cooler head, maybe they would have come to their senses and started fresh without the lied and deception, maybe not I don't know these days.

Thank you for the clarification. A cooling off period may well have helped because the time from one debacle ending and the other starting was too close but regardless what did not help was the secrecy surrounding the main protagonist behind Casino Critique.

As mentioned above, I think we both have the same take on this.

Maybe as you suggest if she had taken things slowly (over say six months to a year) and maybe tried to be part owner of a another project with clearer thinking, then maybe things would have been different.

I could be wrong but I think having escrow in place was part of the plan that gave the project an air of respectability or trustworthiness. Put it this way if the project had Royse777 attaching her name to it from the start how many would have taken any interest in it?

Anyway, right now, is the project really going ahead and who are the current team members? Royse777 closed the Casino Critique thread being used as an ANN here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5409868.msg61211446#msg61211446) and that last message about going solely on Telegram as the thread had no use seems like a scapegoat.

He has started a signature campaign in a self-moderated thread. Logical I guess.

 [OPEN] SINBAD MIXER Signature Campaign. Up-to $75/w | Payment escrowed (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5419242.0)

I personally have nothing against him.

I suppose much of the problem we have seen is due to relying heavily on forum income. That's why he didn't have a cooling-off period after Bitlucy.

I generally recommend to anyone that they have a lot of life outside the forum, and especially that most of their income comes from non-forum sources. I suppose there are some exceptions but for 99.9% of people relying heavily on forum income is a big risk.

Obviously, that's why anyone offers to use escrow.

It claims to have "Payment escrowed", which is a lie:
I wouldn't trust anyone with money problems to act as escrow.

I got the same impression.

That's easy if you live in a country with high wages, but in many countries the average salary (https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/country_price_rankings?itemId=105) is less than you can earn from a Bitcointalk signature campaign.

In the end most of the dynamics in the forum are related to income and money generating. There are too many people using the forum for signature campaigns for most of their income because many are from countries where the monthly average income is less than what they can receive by enrolling on a signature campaign.

Once they look at the statistics, they then start looking at whether alt-accounts are a possibility and most of them cannot be blamed for thinking like that as money is the driving force and maybe that was the issue behind naim027 and all his known alt-accounts.

None of us know about the background situation to Royse777, we have no idea what her domestic situation is like but if memory serves correct there was an allegation and possible admission that Royse777 was not the original creator of the account which if true could mean that financial motive was there from the beginning if an account was purchased. I am fairly sure those were attributed to Royse777 in the past but if I have it wrong, simply regard the comment I made.

Having said that, maybe pressures of a domestic nature or a financial stress (coming from someone living in what I think is still considered as a relatively deprived country) got the better of her. To be clear, probably tens of thousands of others that have used this forum have gone through a situation where they can earn more here in a month than they can earn working their regular job.

I wouldn't call it a lie. While it would make more sense to have a different escrow in Royse777's situation, as long as the campaign participants trust him (which they probably do as evidenced by applying to the campaign) and are aware that he's the escrow I don't see this claim as false. Campaign manager acting as an escrow is quite common as you probably know :)

I think livecasino.io managers also say they have funds in escrow and they personally hold them, like Royse777. So I think suchmoon is right.

The difference in their case is that they don't have money problems (at least that we know of) and both of them have to agree to move the funds.

Do we know for a fact that Royse777 has money problems severe enough that he'd be tempted to steal $2000?

Here is the problem, or at least how I see it. Royse777 seems to be trying to rebuild his reputation. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is a whole other discussion (I personally am a big fan of second chances but not so much of 3rd/4th/etc chances). The point is, he's doing it. By engaging in an activity that he's good at as far as I know. It'd be more worrying if he tried to e.g. buy/sell small trinkets to farm trust or some shit like that. However the only real way to prove trustworthiness is to show that you don't scam when you have a chance to do so. If you use escrow or go first in a transaction you can't prove that you're trustworthy (and positive trust ratings in such situations are worse than worthless IMO). So the reality for Royse777 is that he must ask for other users to risk their money - in this case campaign earnings - and show that he is paying it out, if he wants to rebuild trust in the community.

This is not an endorsement. For all I know he could do just fine with $2000 but build up to a larger exit scam later. Just saying that this escrow set up alone is not an indication of anything nefarious.

Good point, I've edited my post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5414027.msg61230358#msg61230358).

No. I still wouldn't trust an escrow with money problems, but in this case, if the casino mixer trusts Royse777, that should be enough. Campaign participants usually join anything they can, so they don't care about it either.

Yeah, he should probably make it non self-moderated so that JG can continue posting in that topic with all his alt accounts  :P
You can always check post archive and see how many posts got deleted.

I agree he should cool off, but what about main firestarter JG and his witch hunting?
He is intentionally creating conflict and doing constant bump of all topics related with him, he calls him a scammer, and trying to make situation worse.
You can't expect someone to cool off when other guy is jumping on his head all the time.

I think he paid from his pocket to anyone who was damaged in his casino fiasco project.
I wouldn't say he is good example of bounty manager, but I hope he learned a lesson.

Is it a casino or a mixer?
Title say Sinbad Mixer, and I think I saw something about this mixer posted before in forum, I remember opening their website very slow last month.

When I said "logical", I wasn't being ironic. I would have done the same, so it wouldn't be filled with people calling me a scammer and the like. I think in the last signature campaign he managed or tried to manage that's what happened. I remember something like that but I can't be bothered searching for the thread.


We don't know it for a fact. I actually don't think anything bad will happen with this campaign, so I think he will simply try to rebuild his reputation.

I do not recall anybody alluding to that effect and like you I too doubt that $2000 would a tempting amount for either Royse777 or anybody else trying to rebuild their reputation to exit scam. It is highly unlikely in my opinion.

Keeping the Casino Critique and Bitlucy episodes aside, this where Royse777 deserves credit for trying to rebuild her trust and trying to do it by campaign managing.

I have no idea who and what is behind the sinbad.io project or even if it is trustworthy but Royse777 has attached her name to it therefore I hope this does not end with piles of complaints from users that sent crypto intending to be mixed but received nothing in return except losses. I am not saying it will happen, I am hoping that it does not happen both for the reputation of Royse777 and for potential customers.

In the general sense it is a risky strategy associating your name to a business if due-diligence is not applied because it can ruin the reputation and in many cases due-diligence is applied and things still can unfortunately come crashing down. Unfortunately that is how things can work sometimes.

Usually having a third party escrow provides some form of protection depending on the record and respectability of the escrow but does not guarantee anything, likewise having a set up such as the one for sinbad.io (where Royse777 is escrow as well as campaign manager) it is normal as virtually all campaign managers do the same.

I was expecting (I guess everyone else) such a comment from you Mr. Trollybad. No matter what they (whoever opposed you) do, You will find a negative side and create another drama. BTW, Are you afraid of healthy criticism?

I don't think criticism is bad no matter who you are, and I doubt he is afraid. I do think you have turned into a child since you were exposed. Being pissed off for a day or 2 once things came out was to be expected but acting like a little kid because you don't like someone is just silly, not to mention extremely off topic in your replies.

The original issue of who is who has been dealt with and the thread should be locked but unless an admin steps in to lock it likely it will never happen.

Let's say it happens. Sinbad.io project walks away with their clients money. How will it effect Royse777 reputation? As far as I can see he or she is just a campaign manager. Always making your argument against the people you do not like is not a good state of healthy mentality.

Sorry if it's off-topic. But, Topic A related to Topic B, and I am talking about B. So, It's related. You can call me a kid if you want. But, Don't you think my Argument is right? Suppose you manage Winz.io Campaign; what if they start doing shady things? I don't think Campaign managers can do much except stop the campaign.

Yobit did it in the past, and I don't think you have anything to do. So, Why is Royse in question again when is he trying to stay away from the drama and do his things? Don't you think TrollyBad doing it intentionally and trying to keep this drama continuing?

You're fueling this drama yourself, while still blatantly breaking forum rules despite having been unbanned for breaking forum rules. I doubt you could be so daft that you can't see how your "help" is not helping Royse777 at all so I'm assuming you're just trying to take down anyone you can along with you.

Just go away, you're done here.