The best possible route right now will be to file a dispute to their licensor, as Razer has agreed on responding to it promptly. I previously made a mistake by not correcting OP about the master licensor he should be in touch with, which made him reaching to CEG instead of GC and inevitably put the whole case into a wrong direction. If OP would reach to GC, we can probably put this case back into motion of the right track and one step closer at closing it.


Oh, nothing so far worth mentioning other than my epic failure [LOL] of confusing CEG and GC on OP's latest confirmation prior to him reaching the master licensor, which cost him roughly one month of his time [I once again apologize for this overlook, OP]. Other than that, Razer --and through him, Rollbit-- agreed to respond to the case through GC, so yeah, for me, it's another wait and see for GC's ruling and see how both parties adhere and respond to it.

I understand correctly that your argument that ties jimmy0143 and two previously tagged and flagged accounts, brandon6969 and Smith_94, is because both brandon6969 and jimmy0143 offers Content Decryption Modules [CDM]?

Just passing by, please ignore me, I am currently not interested on this case as I have other things to attend, as well as not gonna draw any conclusion about loginsam45, nor that I've ever have to verify a signed message, but tweaking with it a little, the error made on the signing message seems because somehow when he posted his reply, there's space between "eedc" and "e6e4", where it should be a complete line without any space. Not sure why when we quote his post it'll show that the line is uninterrupted, but upon being posted, it'll be broken into two line [the image I show will describe better]





This line, upon being pasted into https://app.mycrypto.com/verify-message, will also have a space, as shown on FatFork's screenshot as well as mine below, and removing that space will validate the message, as shown on the image next to it:



That said, and as I previously said that this is the first time I have to verify a signed message, so I am not well versed on this matter, I am not sure if the message should only be verified by "mycrypto" or if other platform will also work, but I try to verify it on etherscan as a doublecheck and it turned invalid,

---

Edit:

Ok, found it, tweak it out a little, have a feeling that the error is in the message and trying to figure out how the message supposed to be written. "\n" is an line break [enter] --this I figured quite fast-- but I also automatically ignore the space next to the line break, for example in the word "... bluedeep\n I am...", I tried to make them as "... bluedeep[enter]I am", ignoring and deliberately deleting the space between "\n" and "I" where it should be "... bluedeep[enter][space]I am ..." because... who the hell add a space right after a line break?

The whole message body to be pasted to etherscan should be as below:

My Account 1. ltcrstrbrt 2. GigaBit 3. bluedeep
 I am the original owner of this account
 @JollyGood You investigate it properly

 Dated 21-07-2023

and it's validated:

It might be nice and helpful for others if you can add those new addresses to the opening post where it will have a bigger chance of get read by anyone stumbled upon this thread looking about idmining compared to if it's being slipped into the second page of the thread.

Given that there's no sensitive or private information exchanged or provided on those PM, I think the decision to reveal the sender's username is ultimately depends on the purpose of this thread.

Does it serve as a way to help you decide whether the user tried to scam you or not? Then don't, you've reported it to mods, you've made your stance on the PM's purpose.

Does it serve as a way to satisfy your curiosity why he PMed you? Then don't, there's no added benefit on it. He went online yesterday, if he's honest and had any intention to tell you further, he'll already done so. Unless you hope by having his name mentioned, he'll come here to address the concern [which quite unlikely, if we assume he's a scammer with disposable account]

Does it serve as a warning and informing people who might also get PM from him? Then do it, as said above, there's no private information on those PM. Revealing his username might encourage others who probably also got PM from him to report it.

I am not asking you to lock all of your threads, not until your case is solved, what I ask you to do is to close one of them [if I have to be specific, I previously asked you to lock this one and focus on the older one] so every development can be focused in one chronological and neat place. And I am not asking this on behalf of BC.game, I am asking you to do this so anyone who read your case will understand what happened, what's happening, and what will happen easier because they don't have to gather information from two or more threads simultaneously.

Whichever thread you choose to lock is up to you, if you prefer to focus the discussion on this thread, then lock the old one, and likewise, if you prefer to have it on the old one, then lock this. But if you insist to have both, simultaneously, I certainly can't "force" you; It's just an advice to keep everything easier to track.

Case on point, on your other thread the narrative so far is that there's no progress at all, while if people read this thread, they'll learn that you've got a reply and currently in process of resubmitting your selfie.

To level with you, address digging is not exactly my forte, so I can't be a help for this matter, but I think even if an excellent address tracker helped you get to the bottom of the wallet transfer chain, there's a huge chance we still can't pinpoint it to one entity. The pseudo-anonymity of crypto could be a double-edged sword for cases like this, especially for cases like yours where there's no further info we could use as a starting point.

The company is fake, the legal body they mentioned is stolen from others, the IPs are inconsistent [though it's quite obvious it will be]. I think your best shot right now, and it's quite far-fetched, is if you can present your case enough for OKX to freeze the account and reveal the KYC document for that account and filed a criminal complaint toward the user; but like what already presented on this thread, even the KYC itself could be fake and bought, so your filed complaint could still be for nothing.

I don't think I can be much help for you in tracking down to an entity.

Alternatively, and it's also quite unlikely to be realized, if OKX ever replied to you and considered your appeal, maybe you can ask them to "reimburse" you by draining the remaining balance of that user to yours... yeah, as said on the earlier part of this sentence, it's also quite unlikely to be realized.

Yes, Rollbit is not on CEG's jurisdiction and the search on their page will give an invalid result, because Rollbit is not on CEG.

I think I shared a small degree of blame here, because I didn't correct you when you mentioned CEG, and for that, I apologize. With so many cases raised and I read every day, it's hard to keep track which case is whom and about what, and which licensor is handling which casino, so on the latest replies, when you said CEG, I assumed you got that information from the previously mentioned and discussed matter on this thread, and thus didn't correct you or crosscheck your sentence with previously provided info.

But, to double check if I am the one who gave you a wrong info in the first place, I looked back into the thread and found out that I've actually give the correct licensor,


Razer has also provided the link to their licensor on the PM he exchanged with me,


I once again apologize for the overlook that cost you weeks, it didn't registered to me that you misunderstood their master licensor and take your words for granted, thus not correcting you when you mentioned CEG and I even quoted the rules of raising disputes by CEG instead of GC. To summarize, yes CEG is not the license provider you want to contact for rollbit, it's GC, as shown on the Seal of Validation on their website.

Great! Now, if you can lock this thread and move that update to your older thread so everybody can stay focused and follow the development of your case more easily, that'll be very neat.

That company is not theirs, "Bitcoin Mining Company, Ltd." registered under "#12145667" has their own website  with a clear statement that it's their one and only website, as well as a clear difference of office address,



While for the image they used, you don't even need to use maps's streetview to prove it, simply typing the address into the search engine will bring you a lot of image to be used; this website, for example,

.

Yes, the screenshot of betting history drastically changed the narrative as apparently OP indeed did that risk-free betting, the way I perceived his situation at the beginning of the case. OP was online few good hours after CallMeJojo provided the screenshot and said nothing, I'll wait for couple of days to see if he has anything to say, and if he don't, I think this case is as good as solved.

---

That's what I tried to dig more [hence, the ellipsis], especially as the screenshot provided indicates there could be more accounts connected to the IP instead of just him and "his wife".

I didn't check their website up to few hours ago so I can't be sure if it's there before or they just recently put it there, but I think they're trying to counteract those wave of scam alert by placing a banner saying their withdrawal issue has been restored. [archived website].

As for the UK fraud police and no response from them, I think that's because idmining is not from UK. So it's not on their jurisdiction. I can't find their company license or their legal name on their website to prove their registration on UK's database --and most certainly I've checked under "idmining" and it returned zero-- but I am somewhat sure they are not headquartered in St. Vincent, UK, because that office building image itself is taken from the net.

If the purpose is to facilitate other forum members report scammers who shared suspicious links, there's already a very well documented thread for that, which also serves as a request to mods nuke the scammers: Report Malware and Suspicious Links here so Mods can take Action !

If this is true, though I sympathize with your situation, I don't think there's much CG can do if betnomi didn't even respond, let alone has any intention to process your withdrawal. CG [as well as this forum] can only intermediate disputes, they can't force and make any platform to pay any amount due.

Quoting for image visibility


I am not pointing my finger to you or OP, I am trying to clarify things, for the IP shared by three users, I believe OP said that his wife also played, so probably the other one is his wife's, and the third one is... OP, can you shed us some light here? Meanwhile, CallMeJojo does your platform specifically prohibit multiple user from the same address?

Allow me to complete that post you quoted and pointed out another thing regarding address signing, as below:

---

If you came across the thread [which you did] and read them before posting either there or here, you'll also have a knowledge that your second proposal is impossible. I posted on that thread that he doesn't have any address on record and that JeromeTash had to go to unconventional way to dug their old address, and that's from waayy past the timeframe you suggested, three years due to that excuse [read above, the complete reason is well quoted]



Signing a wallet that fits your criteria [used in a campaign in the last 2-3 years] will be a walk in a park as that wallet will be the one he created just earlier this month and surely is in his possession, and it proves nothing, no ties of the ownership with whoever hold the account prior to it waking up.

Wait... you're not joking?

Though it's a quite likely possibility, wouldn't you agree that if this is what happened, then this thread will be filled with people saying they're lucky they've move all of their funds to other casino one week ago or last month, or that they knew that it's coming so they've withdrawn everything, things that goes along the line? But no one said these too.

The lack of complain also befuddled me, but if I have to throw my wild guess, I think most people here are waiting for their good news, still having a good faith that betnomi will return so they don't want to raise their accusation before they have something concrete or more signs pointing south.

---

edit: I am still not sure if this user is being serious or not with his post yesterday, but I just peeked at CG and found a complaint raised about 16 hours ago with similar amount to what he claimed. If that's him on CG, then there's the first case against betnomi regarding their current situation.

---

edit 2: taking a pause to give it another thought from different perspective, there's also a possibility that the complaint is not real and that the user is taking advantage of the current situation. On that other thread where he posted his lost, a competitor was offering [now deleted for whatever reason, that post was also made and removed on this thread too] a consolation bonus for anyone on their platform. I think we should consider a possibility that the user made a bet that betnomi won't join and resolve the situation at CG given their current situation on this forum, thus got it ruled against them and favoring him, and thus he can use that to claim that [now deleted] bonus on neighboring platform.

Aaaannnddd... here come the promotions that will make spam. Though I am not sure at this point, especially with that smiley, if you're being sarcastic, joking, or attempting to be an amateur fraudster. Whatever that is, I suggest you to refrain from it.

If you still want to pursue this from their end, I'd suggest you tell them to deduct it from your current balance, that you're more than happy to get paid with Earning-After-Taxes [EAT], see what they'll responded.


Fair warning, they might will refuse to do so if they deemed your case is not strong enough.