Left them a negative feedback and contacted Lauda, as the user is a newbie (or rather "brand new").
This should be sufficient reason for nuking the account.

---

Done.

Is the second list updated and will you keep updating it? As it says "Sig Spammers or spammers in general  10/25/2016".
If not, can you please give me a recent version of your spamlist I can use for SMAS updates?

Enrolled as discussed via PM.

And if I write "We don't tolerate ban evasion on this forum", I'm an alt account of theymos and among the owners for bitcointalk.org?

I can't ban people. Try again.

I have another account, it's not hard to find it, I even marked that.

I do own the bitcointalk account with the username "Crypto-Games.net". I had previously used this account for marketing purposes related to the site with the same name.
In no case I have left positive trust from one account I control to another. If you want to question my integrity, find something where you can. I'm as open as it gets about this.

You need to learn reading and you need to learn english.
For gods sake, it is even listed in the known alts thread.

Based on their lack of response to my explanation of the examples they had provided, I would guess the user recognized their mistake by now.
In any case, if you got further questions about the provably fair implementation, feel free to contact me about it, and I'll try to help you out as far as I can.

Didn't get an answer yet.

Appreciate the effort, but you're wasting your time, I doubt crazybtrade will get any of it.

---

I've been keeping quiet here for a long time, but let me state a few things.
You're in no way abled to operate a gambling site. You lack basic skills like integrity, honesty, aswell as knowledge about bitcoin and other things.
Further, you're ignorant. And that's your biggest problem.
Just look at this thread, look at all the things brought up (your connection to RollinCoin, the not processed bets, the provably fair problem).
You were not abled to respond to any of it in a statisfying way. You've had more than just one person trying to explain you how things are not the way you presented them,
but you've been sticking to your sick, wrong, imagination of things.

My negative trust on your account is final and won't be removed. I think nobody should trust you with a single satoshi.
Regardless if you are indeed RollinCoin, regardless if you refund the player you screwed over, regardless if you change your wrong advertising claims.

first two cards go to the player, 3+7=10; second set of cards goes to the dealer 10+7=17; now the player hits once, gets dealt a 2, 7+3+2=12, here they stand.
Result of the game: Player has 12 with 3 cards; dealer has 17 with 2 cards. Where does that differ from what you said?

The player gets dealt the first 2 cards, in this case, 7+9=16; the dealer gets dealt the second set of cards, in this case 10+6=16; As the dealer has to hit on a 16, he gets another card, a 2.
Result of the game, the player has 16 with 2 cards and the dealer has 18 with 3 cards.

Moneros hard fork at block 1220516

Make sure you don't provide any references, any proofs, anything other than your very own opinion to support that stance.

And you didn't take the time to verify your provably fair bets?

They had contacted me a while ago, yes.

Payments for this round are a little late, as I was(/am) waiting for funds from lightlord.
Might be releasing a partial payment and inform those that are not included (did this once in the past, you know when you're affected).
Will update you guys know in a moment, once I'm done counting the posts.

---

Partial payment has been sent (87c745761e2206f57159976db4aa8fa45ebecd646c42231b9ef149101e6f0b6f).

No additional enrollments before I got new funds.

Payments for the round have been sent (f128052605f8f5592cad8eb08cc079ca035adc18f5b517ee10201028e11bb614).

---

Enrolled, as discussed via PM.

No furter new enrollments (all open applications are denied, sorry).

You go to this page, unsubscribe from the topic and adjust your preferences:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;sa=notification

It will continue to do so, unless you delete all your posts in the topic.
AFAIK there is no way to get it removed from there other than that.

Payments have been sent (5b020fed9524004e2fc954bbc82aaabecc18f7b6e89d4e8658df8cd352ce547d).
Funds in escrow are running low again, onemd has been informed about that.

I've yet to come across a case where I could not find a solution to get the users paid. (Knocking on wood here) Ideally, I never will have to.

It depends.
Holding coins for more rounds means you have less troubles reminding to get your escrow restocked (or maybe even forgetting about it), for example, I'm holding funds sufficient for at least 6 rounds (=weeks) at BitBlender now.
On the other hand, it also means the runner has to trust you with more funds, and you have to take good care of them. I got other escrows I have restocked every other week.
As a bare minimum, I'd say you should hold funds sufficient for 2 weeks (+transaction fees/your fees), in some cases, that however can be ignored (for example if the campaign is scheduled to end after one).

Depends if the escrow setup is active or passive. An active escrow should pay users asap after the payment schedule is available.
A passive escrow should only get involved in the worst case.

That's a case to case situation you have to figure out for yourself, best with the help of the escrow.
There's no definitive answer as to at what point an escrow (if passive) should get involved.
In the end, the decision comes down to the escrow (and the manager).

Such as?

How much is "a lot" for you?
I'm currently at 170 pages and I notice it's going significantly slower than when things were below 100/empty.
Not 10/20 times as slow, but still, notable.