|
Obvious scam.
Any time a group of developers is too lazy to write their own whitepaper and takes it from others, you know that there is no passion behind the project.
There are no new ideas being brought forth, otherwise the whitepaper would be unique. It's just a money-hungry device of regurgitation.
The lack of team members only adds to that fire of filth.
|
|
|
|
Personally I'm against necro-bumping when there is nothing relevant to say.
Fortunately, mods can sometimes delete the bump (and thus the visibility of the tread) if it is listed as off-topic. One of the greatest achievements of the merit sistem is that it stopped these gruesome people from posting in 2013 threads just to gain activity "because I have the right to post"
I hope those were the kind of bumps you were complanining about (and now you know you can report them) My issue is that there aren't any defined/strict rulesets to depict how long a thread has to be inactive in order for a bump to be considered a necrobump. Personally, I've encountered some barely-substantial posts bumping threads that have been inactive for a few months. I believe some of them were left there while others were deleted. The issue is, though, that it starts up a new wave of spam with old posts (some from over a year ago) being quoted and answered as if they were being asked now. Example: "price reaching $X" post from 2015 being responded to now. |
|
|
|
The fuck is this shit? New shitcoin backed up by government agencies   |
|
|
|
a giveaway! Did you say........... giveaway? good project when airdrop? |
|
|
|
|
I would advise others to be cautious about approaching this user, especially with personal details and collateral.
With a lack of history, the user may be attempting identity theft or personal theft (of your collateral).
|
|
|
|
|
What kind of collateral do you have? Publicly stating the type thereof shouldn't be a problem.
Any relatively-high volume altcoin should do the trick or another easily liquidatable piece of collateral.
|
|
|
|
|
If you wanted the mathematical formula (I assume) that would be:
1 - (chance of winning/losing)^(bets) for the % chance of having a "bets-long" streak.
|
|
|
|
They "might" be winning but even if that same person doesn't someone like him may win, or someone else~
That was the point I was trying to make. You can't make the assumption that everyone loses the EV. It doesn't work like that because there is variance of luck and in reality, some players win and others lose. You two are arguing different cases. TheQuin is talking about the individual cases of variance. darewaller is talking about the aggregate: the holistic sum of all profits. That is, even if an individual from the entirety wins some, on average, those losses (on the casino's end) are made up with other players losing the same amount or more. These are, of course, statistical likelihoods and hence the results are always probabilistic. |
|
|
|
Assuming that at least some of the details are true... I sincerely doubt that this would be a roundtrip from Yemen and that you have a business that could repay $20k by the end of the year if you haven't got any savings and have to borrow even to get passports.
Thank you suchmoon for you replay. I can assure to you that I can get the 20k$ by the end of this year. How do you intend to do this? If you can't reveal any sensitive information, then at least tell us this. No lender is going to have confidence in your reliability if you're not willing to at least relinquish details on how you intend to handle things after you get the money. If there's no anticipated way of repaying the loan then it's a very high-risk transaction. |
|
|
|
|
Stipulation of the combination of account name, requirements and account history:
Likely identity theft.
Definitely going to say that this is not something any legitimate user should try to involve themselves in.
|
|
|
|
Additionally, you can see from this user's history, that they have a habit of accusing every site of scamming and have accused BitDice in the past when losing a bet. Cheers. Somehow I managed to miss that this time. The situation seems much clearer now.
You weren't satisfied with the compensation and you decided to try a hail mary to get the rest of the scraps? Hmm... |
|
|
|
-snip- Low-hanging fruit. I already asked for something other than alt account accusations. How about something that has to do with BetKing itself? As an entity. Maybe something that addresses one of the topics that JollyGood's opened? After all, those are the main topics against BetKing that he's sprouted.
Just so you know, by the way, I liked BetKing before they revoked the buyback that they promised. I was a supporter of the product. Was. |
|
|
|
I'm done with you guys, your forum is corrupt! You all lie! You All make assumptions that fit your narrative that your riding! You ain't hurting Dean at all, your just hurting investors in ICO! Dude ain't even trying to make a freaking penny , he wants us to be made hole!
I don't like how when you realize you've thrown away your last out, you decide to just call bullshit on the whole situation and try to dismiss everything as lies and corruption. Blanket statements may make a situation easier to approach, but that's only because you're covering up the parts you don't want to deal with. |
|
|
|
invested about € 100 in BKT coin, already made some nice profit. My $700 in BKB tokens dropped to about $7 in BKT tokens. Wait until your €100 in BKT tokens turnes into €1 of the next token Dean makes up. My crypto portfolio was 60K now its 10K crypto = scam troll No one promised your crypto portfolio would have a minimum price of 60k. (and if someone did, you were scammed). Another multi-account used to promote scammer Dean Nolan and his scam betking website  Every person you have accused of being a multi account user is in fact a real user, why do you continue to lie and repeat it over and over. Beautiful, but how does that relate to an argument that JollyGood has against Dean? This isn't exactly something that JollyGood has used as evidence to call BetKing a scam, now, is it?
I disagree with the accusatory remarks of calling users alts. It doesn't matter if they are, but assuming that fact without substance makes one fall prey to the same fallacious tendencies propelled by desperate scammers. Arguments proposed by anyone should be argued purely on the basis of the argument, not of the individual. |
|
|
|
and Dean came from good place when he bought unhappy people out, your basically arguing that in any shape or form Betking investors should not have lost anything despite how poorly the site did, so your basically mad because people didn't get a risk free investment. Show me where I can find risk free investment? You are strawmanning my argument. Do not twist my words to fit into a more easily-collapsible argument because that is a poor way of creating a rebuttal. The site was absolutely not risk-free. However, the price formula was as follows: fundsRaised / 70,000,000 + profit / 100,000,000 The original token price was set at $0.09286 / BKB. Thus our formula is then $0.09286 + profit / 100,000,000
The issue is that investors were promised buybacks which were then rescinded. How is that justifiable to you? |
|
|
|
GO READ all my responses to him that he ignored by blocking me for months! Nothing at all comes to mind? You're going to make me waste an hour looking through your posts just so that I can see when you're responding to JollyGood's claims? At least give me something here. If you can just think up ONE example of when he lied, I will acquiesce. Or better yet, if you can dig up one of your posts that directly demolishes Jolly's argument, that would be even better. Not one where you deflect and call him names. |
|
|
|
says the serial liar! Where did he lie? Don't start dismissing things without refuting them... isn't that what you wanted from me? ( It is the accusers job to prove, you show me proof, I don't have to do shit amigo.)
I'll be waiting for your response in the other thread. |
|
|
|
i already contacted them
and they said they wont payout and there excuse was they where to cancel a winning bet .
a bet you can easly check and see was 100% legit and done right I have no opinion on this yet since your screenshot doesn't reveal anything. Given that the bet details showed "canceled" on the profit box, it doesn't actually reveal anything from either side. I've just sent a PM to BoXXoB asking them to investigate.
For now: insubstantial evidence to make a claim towards either side. |
|
|
|
If you can give a lemons flag for something "you believe" to be negative and "not directly " related to behaviors that demonstrate clear financial wrong doing then it becomes useless and carries a lot less weight. "This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and it is not based on the user's opinions." It may be linked to the possibility of financial loss but that does not mean the user has had to scam prior to the flagging thereof. Moreover, yellow flags are for newbies. How about this scenario? A user is a self-admitted troll, gray-hat hacker, and hardcore anti-bitcoinist. They ask for a loan.
You're free to start your own flag against Lauda and outline the evidence for others to develop an opinion of which should end up in support (if you're using flags properly). You're also free to ask theymos to oppose your flag and/or remove Lauda from DT |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
