I understand. I'll reopen this case by marking it as "in progress" under the basis that we're waiting for their representative to explain further about the circumstances around your case [I can't mark it as active, as their representative already attended the thread, though only once and never returned].

Something worth mentioning though, I don't think it'll be resolved, there is another case open for them, and they're not attended by their representative.

Other than what they've instructed on their guide [screenshot of it below], to write an email to their support, requesting it, they also have an "instant" self-exclusion procedure where we don't have to write that email [screenshot of it also below], alongside with the standard 24h cool-down period prior to longer exclusion, though it seems they don't have a "self-service" exclusion like other casino I know.

The way I understand it, the player will have to click the self-exclusion request, and they'll have to confirm via email sent to the player. Interestingly, I am yet to receive that email, though I've clicked the self-exclusion button from like half an hour ago

He doesn't have to. I'll quote all of his images if he upload them to talkimg so it'll be visible for everybody. I can't download his current screenshots into JPG or PNG or other image extension, thus I can't reupload them to talkimg myself.

---

I've send their representative a PM, do you mind to please wait a little longer for him to notice it? He's been offline for few days, maybe it'll took him a couple of days before he come back in and read my PM. If by Thursday he's yet to be online and your situation doesn't resolve itself, I'll try other ways to notify them about this situation.

I don't think I can list who noticed these past incidents, but I believe OP was referring to these two:

STAKE IS SCAM ($12,000)
Stake Casino Scam Locking 45k$ Balance

It got dragged for months with impossible [borderline invasive] requirements, but they've eventually cleared out. One allowed to do withdrawal instantly, while the other one got his fund withheld for a suspicion of manipulation [that Jontay Porter scandal]. That one [the second one on the list] is, IMO, a case of ethic vs. legal. Stake legally allowed to do so through their ToS, but ethically, what they did is uncalled for.

Hi,

I've read all of your screenshots, but my plate is currently a bit full to transfer them to talkimg for visibility and easier access. Can you please re-upload them yourself to talkimg? It's an image hosting by one of our member, it'll make things easier. I'll quote for visibility after you upload them there.

Meanwhile, to clarify about one topic you raised for their live support, about notifying players from the beginning if they're not allowed to bet on sports, I believe they can't actually do that. Limiting bets are decision that's made by either the provider or the platform as the player progressed with their plays. They don't make this decision from the second you signed up.

Last, I believe if what you tell us is the whole story here, then we can try to ask FJ's representative to sort it out. I'll PM him and invite him here.

---

Edit: Oh, almost forgot to add, they allow you to withdraw on 31st March valued USDT 1,500, is because as per 31st March, your total depo was 2,199, and the wagering requirement [as you played on sport] was 0.5. thus, you've met them with this wager. However, wagering requirement for casino is 2x instead of 0.5, thus you'll needed to wager more.

Regarding why they require you to wager everything from "zero" again instead of deducting what you've made on sportsbetting, that'll hopefully what their representative can explain here.

---

Let's not. OP has made their accusation thread here, let's just focus on one thread instead of having multiple discussion at once. It'll be confusing. I'll PM FJ.

You can make your own thread, describing the situation on scam accusations board, preferably with format as shown on this thread, as it'll help people understand the issue and key facts at glance. The button to create a new thread will be on the upper right side of the board, labeled "new topic".

You can upload the supporting evidences [screenshots of conversation, email, and the likes] through talkimg, it's a image hosting service provided by one of the prominent member of this forum. As you're still in newbie rank, images won't show on your post by default unless you buy a copper membership or ranked up. But don't worry much about image visibility, someone will quote those images for you and make it visible.

Ignoring what Mahdirakib's feedback said about you... you do aware that their games are provably fair? And you do understand what provably fair means and how it works?

At this point, I am failed to see any strong basis to say that this thread is a scam accusation against Stake or BC. It's more like... a complaint and venting up after a big loss, and those two are definitely not justified as a reason to call a platform or two scam.

Please come back with strong supporting evidence or lock this thread.

I'd like to see that my wall of text --that's located above the post you replied to-- was not there just to be a decoration, and I find it rather hard for you to miss it by accident. May I ask why you don't bother to address any of them?

I'll say that's a fair request. But is that really feasible? You can demand them to explain, rain their support with emails inquiring this, you can perhaps reply to CG [which you haven't, by the way, and they've extended your response time to clarify that you've got your fund] and ask them to ask Stake for explanation, but let's be realistic here, how low is the chance --you think-- Stake will give any answer for this?

Best you can get will mostly a, "it's just a routine random check, players are agreeing to this when they sign up." Will you be satisfied with that? As unfair as it sounds, perhaps even anticlimactic, wouldn't it be better and easier for your mind to just take this as a winning and let it go?

Stake suck, big time, on this case. Many people overseeing this thread are agreed with that. I think it's a consolation enough, because the alternative will be you pursuing a ghost of an answer for an undefined time. So, if I were you, after about half a year of being stressed, walking off with my entire balance in my pocket sounds nice.

I read the post earlier today, but only managed to compose a reply just now. OP, I'm glad that your case meet a happy ending. The neighboring case where the player also had to went through rigorous KYC doesn't end well. They investigated your account after he passed KYC and found a "breach".

As other said, please mark this as resolved and lock this thread. I'll update the list with this current development. If I may also suggest... perhaps stay a good kilometer away from Stake for a while?

I believe he's trying to reply to yahoo62278 but doesn't know how to quote, it'll make more sense. I can assure you though, OP, that yahoo has no business with TD. He's simply voicing his opinion and he's not siding with TD.


Apparently, he already did, before he even made his posts here. Link to his CG complaint as below:
https://casino.guru/trustdice-casino-player-s-account-closed-without-identity

Publicly? Not that I know of. I look at allof OP's threads, none seems to be attended by TD's representative, even the one that's not on this board.

OP, I'll once again ask you, lock your other threads. Choose one that will be your main [and only] thread, then focus on that one only. Having more than one thread of same issue will only create confusion and difficulties to follow updates.

I think I'll need a confirmation. Do by "now under control" you mean you've done the spreadsheet and you don't need me to do the rest of 120-ish of the entries?

Alright. So, what I did/do is a very simple and shallow research. I am running these addresses through ninjastic and see how many people posted the address in the past. I understand that it won't be accurate, in sense that someone that I marked as green can still probably connected to other participants and abusing this bounty through Blockchain detection.

However, I think this one is enough as a preempetive elimination for those who clearly abused the bounty through multiple acc enrolment. In short, I am limiting the research on whether the wallet address is only ever used by the submitter.

If address was used by several UID in the past, that happens to also enroll on that campaign, I think it's safe to say it indicate a bounty abuse. But, if the address was used by more than one UID, but was not shared in this specific bounty [thus, just a case of multi-acc, but arguably not an abuser], below should be the ones that eligible and next to it are not eligible, with list of other accounts being mentioned next to it... I think we can use these info for Known Alts of any-one - A User Generated List Mk IV (2024 Q2) [MODERATED] 🤨🔬?

1. RTR~ | 0xc1...07E9
2. Bitluck77 | 0x7b...ae6B
3. Freelancershojib | 0x30...3E60 - lovesmayfamilis's detection - projectdevelopment [A7]
4. Pompom0 | 0x99...b2e0 - Moskan70 [A32]
5. Uvx | 0x74...0E10
6. projectdevelopment | 0x81...Ef9B - this address is clean, but he's still related to [A4]
7. Ki Kos | 0x39...7B69
8. Somar50 | 0x5a...9E8E
9. akash khan | 0x5c...ff30
10. Pompom0 | 0xbe...9a7c - address is clean, but how sure are we he's not related to [A5] Pompom0?

11. Mohima - rejected by the spreadsheet
12. Fahim90 - rejected by the spreadsheet
13. Tiemonium | 0x86...Ed1e
14. Jaba90 | 0x21...daD9
15. BitcoinKillerTok | 0x08...8d13
16. vip342820 | 0x87...E2f3
17. Mehedi72 | 0x68...fF25
18. Mehedi09 | 0x19...F160
19. Thba | 0xE3...09CC
20. Sobuj02 | 0x5a...BeB0

21. Sumikhanom500 - rejected by the spreadsheet
22. Tahid12 | 0xf4767A
23. Whait444 - rejected by the spreadsheet
24. Justin999 - 0x1c...E999
25. Santa656 - rejected by the spreadsheet
26. younas@76872 | 0x07...1dDf
27. Shifa111 | 0xdf...2dbd
28. Jery10 | 0x01...8DDC
29. Sumoia5 | 0x13...A39b
30. Abdullahayan | 0x4D...451F

Hi,

Sorry, I just got my time to come here from your invitation yesterday. If I may satisfy my curiosity, why do the distribution delegated to you?

And I understand here that the problem is to verify whether the participants and their wallet are legit and is not a result of the previous manager's attempt to tamper them?

---

Edit: I was 30 entries deep when I noticed that the one I am reviewing is the original spreadsheet? So it wasn't filtered from those "possible tamper" yet? And the new sheet will be published soon, but not yet available? And there is a big probability that it'll be much different than the one available right now?

Well... OK, I think I'll better wait for that one.

But umm... after some re-consideration, how do we know that some bounty cheater will not change their details for the new spreadsheet to avoid detection?

I think it'll worth considering to make that they can only confirm if the address is indeed theirs and not edited by the previous BM. The same method I am using to make a quick scan [it'll still take hours to be done, though] should be enough to tell us whether the address is tampered or not, given if it is, then the address should have never been posted by the participants before.

Meanwhile, I'll post that result here, as it'll be like a waste of time if I just delete them and leave them unposted.

---

Mods, it seems I'll make a consecutive post, because I think I'll be better if I made the list in one separate post. So... forgive me.

OP, please lock this one and stays on your earlier thread. Creating multiple threads about same topic/accusation will only confuses people overseeing it. I am downloading your screenshots and moving it to your older one.

Next time, please use talkimg, it'll make things easier.

LMAO, yes, something like that. I still have the screenshot provided by someone else notifying me about this doxxing attempt in my gallery.

That said, I won't really dwell in the past. Maybe they've improved their HR, maybe that marketing guy was still behind the posts but learned his lesson. Anyway, I'll treat them like any other casino/forum user if they'll answer their case here

---

They did not, ignore scam accusation. At least not as far as I know. They'll probably handle it privately by PM and/or through CG. And no there are not, currently, though that's probably purely due to their withdrawal from this board. But there was a time where two or three cases stacked against them.

---

They still will, just not on this board. They'll address issues if it's raised on [let's say] gambling board or somewhere else. But once it's moved here, they'll refrain from it

Will?

So you're winning, and suddenly everything went to 0 despite the actual accumulated balance? Perhaps it'll be easier to understand if you can provide those screenshots; it'll be very much appreciated. I might be able to reach to someone from BC and see if they can take a look at it for better understanding what happened from their end.

Wait... I... umm... posted obnoxious stuffs? Uhh...? thanks?

Anyway, moving to the topic, they do specified that they'll exclusively refrained from replying to any cases posted on this board, but not on other board, like gambling or perhaps even their own ANN [though it'll derail the flow of discussion of the ann itself]. What I somewhat sure is they will not appreciate if one of the two users [or both] that used to "harass" them --namely, me-- appears and oversee the case on whatever thread or board it is to oversee the case. So, how do you propose to overcome this issue?

Though I don' think that's necessary or worth any further discussion. As you said yourself, you'll only lend your thread it it's sportsbet related, and not casino related. OP's situation is with casino gambling: