According to this old digging by decodx, yes, they shared an address and username. This was part of OP's evidence on his opening post, though he can only share link because the thread was locked. It was also repeated here [quoted below], so their alt relationship is pretty much established.



[p.s.: I envied your avatar, LOL]

Ok, this question might sound stupid, but... are we sure it is a glitch and not something like a deposit bonus promo and the likes? I tried to toy with the amount, counting in a rounding error, the number is indeed around 20%, it's a tad bit too precise for a random glitch and, IMO, more like a bonus?

Breathable?


Challenge accepted. How about these for a reason for doubt? This is what your website said [archived]



Copyright 2019-2023, Bitcase Group, Ltd., Cyprus, where the event itself is to commemorate 15 million cases.

1. Your page is copyrighted from 2019, while it's just six months old. BitCase, the "parent company" of yours, who held the event for 15 million cases, are created even more recent



2. Bitcase Group, Ltd. is the name of the registered company. Depends on which website people accessed, it's either registered in Cyprus [for those who access it from markeeter[dot]com] or in UK if seen from bitcase[dot]org [archived]. They're both came negative, though.





3. The header of markeeter is clickable and linking to bitcase [as it should be, given it's the subsidiary of bitcase group]. [Edit: proof-reading it prior to hitting the post button and I found that it's no longer redirecting me to bitcase page? I can swear to any holy being that I was redirected from clicking the header, though] On bitcase, we'll be able to see testimonials from Portia Villa who apparently also has a twin named Lexie Cuevas who happen to write the review and uhh...



Catrine Galvan and Kellis Humphries?




Polly Rush?


Thought?

No, I don't think anyone other than efialtis did. Or, if anyone do, I don't think they managed to get in touch with Crashino's representative, given their last online activity was in 18 April, months ago. Your best shot will be to try to ask efialtis to reach them again.

Are you waking up from six years of long sleep just to give testimonial about this site? You're amazing.

What he offered is a better way to promote the platform than those questionable posts made above, suppose the platform itself is legit [he'll do a DD prior to accepting to be hired]. I understand it might be quite difficult for you to follow the recent situation of this forum [and this is me assuming you're still the original owner of this account] due to the long sleep. But the user you quoted is one of the top notch campaign manager on this forum.

I'm quoting the original post being referred here in full [below], just for the sake of added context. If I may add, aside from what yahoo said, one that's also not allowed is to add one's main account into alt's their trust list [on this case, I'll assume Haunebu is the main and 3kpk3 is the alt], though it's ok to add your alt to your main's trust list.

---

I personally think it doesn't sound good [me and my own opinion, of course]. If a session needs a manual termination button, there's a chance someone forgot to click the button, and thus, one step backward from privacy [as explained by examplens and bhadz]. If dev wants to venture into an option to manually terminate a session, I think it'll be better to reverse the proposed idea; instead of having the manual termination button by default, dev add a check mark to allow people to keep the session longer or until they pressed the termination button. Otherwise, the sessions will end like always.

Not sure about the implications behind this, though. Wouldn't it mean sinbad has to keep a log [albeit selectively] to cater this idea? I can imagine some people will not welcome this idea.

---

I loved icalical's and PX-Z's first design, the pixelated ones, purely because it matched the current retro-pixelated theme of the site

This is actually part of the reason why I asked BC.GAME my question. I'd like to know if there's more behind this case, if we need to take OP's cases with grains of salt or if OP is one of the unluckiest person on earth. Is it true that OP's KYC is locked and why is that?

BC said that, other than a case of violation of sportsbook on the part below that I snipped, dragged cases like OP's happen when they've been repetitively given explanation by CS,


but if we give OP's explanation of the situation a benefit of doubts, then this case is actually a case of negligence from BC's side.

OP reached them to inform them that he can't do KYC as it's locked --bug or whatever-- and based on what we can conclude from the current narrative, their customer service informed him repetitively but no solution was given or made. OP's KYC is still locked. I can only assume that they require KYC as a preliminary step of sportbetting abuse, so it rather doesn't make sense if they locked OP's KYC while they tried to find a ground on OP's case.

Meanwhile, from the other side of the table, if we take weight on Dexsport's explanation on the other thread, that OP violate their TnC, it'll be a recurring theme of OP.

Thus, I'd like to ask BC.GAME --I think this question does not and will not jeopardize their security algorithm of fraud detection, so I don't see why they can't answer this-- is it true that OP's KYC page is locked, in spite of him --according to what's implied on your statement-- been trying to solve it by repetitively reaching your customer service? If so, why is that?

There's an ongoing discussion on their ANN about considering using funds escrowed by MJ to compensate what's lost by this... incident, but I think [if the idea is approved] the priority should be compensate those who deposited on whirlwind first, and later on to the campaign participants

Wasn't the initial problem that OP raised is a KYC situation? OP tripped over a KYC trigger, which I assume --based on your explanation-- was triggered by a third party risk management team, and when he tried to submit the documents, he can't do it because there is no button to submit them?

Flip.gg is not on this forum, they don't have any ANN, as well as --far as I know-- any account or community manager that can represent on their behalf. So there's no way to summon them. If they're here, I'll be more than happy to bring this matter to their awareness and invite them to address this issue.

As been repetitively informed, their clearnet has been down for a while, their tor version is still up and running though. Charles-Tim already gave you a guide on how to use the tor site from the other thread. If you're still unclear about how to use tor and want to try to access their tor site, I can guide you step by step. But, the current advise for the time being is to refrain from depositing until the pending transactions came through.

First of all, I'll post the BBcode version of the [currently] only image you provide so anyone can see things easier



with that made visible, I'd urge you to edit the opening post with the format and more evidences than what the image above provide us, as logfiles suggested. This board runs on evidences, it'll be very much appreciated and helpful if you can give proper materials to back up your claim for the DTs to tag them [you do aware that you can tag them yourself too, right?] if they're proven to be the wrong side here, because the current evidences you gave is... very limited and didn't give us enough insight.

I will also urge you to inform them [preferably after you edited this thread with proper format] about this thread. Your post on their ANN did not direct them to this accusation thread and they probably didn't know where to address your issue. I can do that for you if you want to [though I don't see why], but I'd prefer to do it after you made this thread "complete".

And lastly, no, I am somewhat sure that shasan is not working for them.

Three things. One, no one can "not accept" the wallet as it's been sent months ago, the receiver already received the wallet, it can't be undone. Two, no one can participate on the free-raffle/giveaway anymore as it's been done months ago, the events are no longer exist. And three, if you bother to read at least one or two latest posts --if not few more-- to get a better grasp of the latest situation and development of a case before posting, you'll see GazetaBitcoin Grizzly-ta-Bear-coin gave a very nice summary of his very long and extensive due dilligence on the other thread about the ledger.

They're [arguably] abusing merit, I'll take your word for that and won't bother to crosscheck, but do they cheat the community that warrant a negative feedback? You requested us, the DTs, why doesn't we leave them a negative feedback. And you've been repetitively asked, "what scam?"

Perhaps I should invite you to reacquaint yourself with what trust feedback said and dictate,



Do the users you mentioned poses a high-risk to the community if they trade with them? If you can provide arguments backed with evidences that they poses such threat --thus will potentially scam the community-- I'll probably consider about leaving tag. Otherwise, it's a case of merit abuse, not a scam.

I'll quote this one as it summarizes the latest exchanges of communication. Has someone suffered a damage or financial lost caused by the user you mentioned? Or, does the user you mentioned poses a risk of causing other user financial damage?

I don't understand this part. Which scam is this? The merit abuse? Or did you find another evidences [that you're yet to present here on this thread] that they scammed someone?

On that case, if your story is what actually happened and it's a simple mix up, you can rest assured that SB will sort everything up. For the time being, I noticed no one asked you yet if you're the only one accessing SB in your home. Are you?

I think you're a bit behind on the development of the entire whirlwind's situation. There's already a reply and explanation made by Hhampuz on their ANN thread, which also quoted by Logfiles on post #14 of this thread.

There were not enough evidences to conclude your situation here to determine what's really going on. I will try to reach SB's representatives and see what he thought about this matter and give SB's side of the story. They are very attentive and handled cases fairly if it's proven to be a simple misunderstanding. Please give more time and wait a moment for my PM to be notified by them.