So this is the proof that the real Twipple, Ume and this Twipple are 3 individuals as their IPs are different, right?
Yes we are 3 different individuals. Now the thread has changed to the negative trust that TBZ has on me. That trust be on Ume and his alts. |
|
|
|
theymos finally sent me an IP-redacted seclog AFTER Twipple quoted theymos sending the IP-unredacted one. +---------------------+---------------+----------+
| UTC Time | ip | type |
+---------------------+---------------+----------+
| 2015-01-25 14:57:57 | x | Password |
| 2015-01-25 17:53:01 | x | Password |
| 2015-01-31 10:49:55 | x | Password |
| 2015-01-31 10:53:13 | x | Password |
+---------------------+---------------+----------+ Password events 2 & 3 were from IPs in a netblock with munir.ahmed @ ptcl.net.pk in the WHOIS. Googled that email and found http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=CZPFGta1 - is that Ume? abuse @ rdsnet.ro in WHOIS for the first IP. jacek @ euronet.net.pl & piotrs @ euronet.net.pl in WHOIS for the last IP. In an account sale, I can see if seller password starts as x (their original password), is provided to an escrow as x, the escrow changes it to y, gives it to the buyer as y, and the buyer changes it to z. That's 2 changes. But why change the password 4 times? This all makes less sense as time goes on. Yes , thats Ume. So Twipple changed the password on 25th , and provided it to Ume (for the loan) . Then Ume changed the password himself. (2nd one). Then when he sold it to me, He changed the password to the one which is in the the PM image I sent to you(3rd one), and then I am the last one to change it(4th) after that. |
|
|
|
I think it is better for dadice if they show proof of funds even they don't need to. It is their reputation at stake here. Swallow the pride, provide a proof of solvency and silence the doubters once and for all is the best direction forward.
Let me guess what might happen next. Tomorrow they will come up , and say that all these discussions have affected their business, and some big investor divested from the site. So if their original amount was 500 BTC , then only 100 BTC is left. And they will just show the proof of that. OR Some player will get lucky and win big on the site tonight. And they will claim now only a small amount is left out of the investments. |
|
|
|
I don't think dadice will be a scam in the future, and guys, you can request proof of solvency for other casinos, here is the lists: satoshibet, nitrogen, directbet, cloudbet, bitcasino, blablabla, see are they willing to show your the wallet or proofs, I think the answer would be NO.
They don't show that proof because they are not investment sites. All those sites just hold player deposits, which usually is a much smaller amount. |
|
|
|
Which is part of what makes me ask about the motivations behind the attack. I really wonder if it's just a bluster war gone nasty. I know that NLNico didn't like being denied when he felt like he offered a good favor to dadice. I know dadice didn't like being told what to do or to show his bankroll to Stunna. So now here we are, with two camps beating their drums.
From what I can tell, those who are skeptical have had their say and have left their feedback. Dadice doesn't want to kowtow to them so he's going to do his own thing (which, as we all agree, has been going just fine). Time will tell who was right and what the situation really is here. Now, everyone who puts money on dadice is an adult and can judge things for themself, I think.
I don't think there was any motivation, apart from the part that he probably saw they didn't have proof of funds only yesterday, and asked the question. As for Stunna reviewing the proof of funds, its only an option for them. They are more than welcome to show it to some trusted member of the community. The fact that they are denying from showing any proof of funds is another blow to their customer base and future. But thats something they are willing to accept for not showing the funds, which is fishy here. But yeah all adults should make smart decisions. And the smartest one is to not invest your money on any site  |
|
|
|
I always thought that the BTC community was there to support newbies in the industry. Yet all I have encountered is a bunch of bullies who try to make other people run their businesses they want them to. If an investor says they do not want things made available to the public, what business is it of someone else to tell them otherwise?
I find it abhorrent that you guys yell scam at every opportunity you get. Why not give someone the benefit of the doubt for once? I realize there have been many scams in the past, but this does not give you the right to yell wolf at every opportunity.
Since they have closed down their investment side, I do not see why it is necessary to keep bashing people over the head with the same thing over and over again. Give them the opportunity to show you they are not a scam. Act like grown ups, and atop throwing your toys out of the cot because someone does not do business your way.
Support newbies ? Yes. thats what happened with Dadice till now. But now that they are handling a much bigger invested amount, its time to show if they are not faking it, and are at least solvent. No one shouted scam till yesterday . |
|
|
|
But the main issue here is one of trust. These guys refuse to demonstrate that they still have the coins they are supposed to have, but have offered no good reason for their refusal. The most likely reason is that they no longer have all the coins they are supposed to have.
I would say most of it was probably given out paying for the campaign, and other advertising costs, which they wanted to probably use to become Big. But now that they are required to show the proof, its all backfiring. They also probably showed an increased investment amount which is another reason for them to not show any proof of funds. |
|
|
|
Shocking to read people accusing the dadice site which was said to be a trustworthy site before. Every gambling or dice site is definitely risky but to accuse some website without having any open scam accusation is weird. Hope this site never turns out to be a scam site and they keep paying their users as before and this speculation proves to be false. The campaign has really helped a lot of users  Just because the campaign worked out, doesn't mean it is not a scam. At this stage it is a probable scam, so is the reason why there is no scam accusation against it . But all those related have already been negative repped. |
|
|
|
The big investor excuse makes sense, if you really think about it.
There are always workarounds. All you need is a proof that Da Dice has control over such amount of funds as it shows, right? Yes. That is all we are asking. Since DaDice claims to have 90+% of the funds themselves, I asked -multiple times- to just show their own coins only. So the investor excuse is completely irrelevant. Look, I don't blame you. They have been great for their players, you have been dealing always with success with them, they have been paying everyone etc etc.. so you truly believe they have those coins. I understand this from your perspective. But those watching objectively just want to see actual proof of solvency - and you seem to agree with that too. So yeh, all we ask for is proof they have those coins and this will be all solved. But it might be surprising to you if this proof never comes. They have had so many wrong excuses that those, who have not been "blinded" by how nice the DaDice team is, are seriously doubting that they have the coins. And scam accusations based on that are completely right. All they need to do is just prove their solvency. No big deal if they have the coins. Come to think of it, if it was any other business or site, and had the coins. They know that its important to keep the customers happy for the present and the future. What they would do in the normal case would be move the largest investor's coins to another wallet, and have another cold storage wallet for the normal funds. Then they can show proof of funds, to all or at least an escrow.
They have also spent a lot in development of their site, as well as marketing. They can't spend it unless they had it in the first place..
This is analogous to the Ponzi scenario. Even when Ponzi operators pay out, they essentially do so from the investor funds. It could very well be the case for Dadice, that they are spending the investor funds on the other marketing budgets and could be one reason they do not want to show proof of being solvent. |
|
|
|
Then you cannot trust any site whatsoever. A ponzi is a scam from the beginning. They either lie about their earning rates or tell you it is a ponzi in the first place.
If you apply the same principles, you cannot trust any outsider except yourself..
Honestly, I don't trust any site , but its better to avoid sites which show higher chances of ending or running as a scam . Dadice is sort of doing that . |
|
|
|
MoneyPot (the game) never took public investments.
and: I informally invested 53 BTC in the bankroll for about 24 hours and made 11 BTC, or in other words 20% overnight. Eric forcibly divested me the next day. The game never took investments from the public. I came to a private arrangement with Eric to help him out with some coins when the site was going through a rough patch. I didn't actually even send him the 53 BTC, I just told him I would send it if he needed it. I guess it was the first ever "offsite investment", infinitely leverasged. He still sent me the 11 BTC profit though. Yes, that was the confusing part. That doesn't seem like the confusing part, but rather thats what you called being honest and transparent. That just how some of the sites operate. |
|
|
|
Many are talking as if Da Dice is a scam. Find me a single scam accusation, lol.  How are you even comparing? Edit: People are unaware of the facts. There is no withdrawal that did not get honored. Nor are there any complaints regarding loss of funds, or anything related. This is pure speculation. Da Dice hasn't yet provided a Proof of Solvency. But, that doesn't make it a scam... A competitor just made random hits, and he got lucky at one.. Did you know , A ponzi is not a scam unless it defaults on the payouts ? All the while it runs, its just like this claiming to have money, but shows no proof of it. Thanks to bitcoin , we can have that proof, and not showing it, just means one thing. The big investor excuse is stupid isn't it ? And now that trusted people are ready to verify solvency, refusing that means you know what. |
|
|
|
In the SecLog appears only the 'last 30 days' and it is normal, but why have you opened a thread about your personal matter? I think it would be better a PM to an admin, the normal mod can't confirm.
I did PM Badbear, but he didn't reply . Just reopening this so that him or the other Mods who might access to the log can reply. |
|
|
|
Hi, I would like to request an admin or a Moderator to confirm the password change on this account(Twipple) on and around 31st January. https://bitcointalk.org/seclog.php only shows logs till around April 19th . Thank you. Would a password being changed prove that ownership changed? Please don't bother commenting on the issue when you know nothing about it. I have already sent him the PM proof. Best for you to stay out of it, unless it relates you in anyway. |
|
|
|
Hi, I would like to request an admin or a Moderator to confirm the password change on this account(Twipple) on and around 31st January. https://bitcointalk.org/seclog.php only shows logs till around April 19th . Thank you. |
|
|
|
It seems that the sale was in fact faked and he slipped up that no one caught on. I would prepare to get your inbox spammed by a lot of PM's from this person.
Quickseller now whats your problem again ? Why do you think it was faked ? I was the one who started the scam accusation against Ume(before any negative trust was added) , Why would I be stupid enough to do that ? |
|
|
|
Ok, then the only PM I'm interested in at this point is from a mod/staff member who can show a preponderance of the evidence (logs, hostnames, etc) one way or the other. Don't PM me again Twipple, unless a mod/staff has told you they PMed me that first.
I would be happy to PM an admin or Mod to check that for you and confirm it. I would also be happy to have an escrow log in to my account and check the messages to confirm that. |
|
|
|
|
I am sure they do. I see people like redsn0w and a couple other guys who keep posting 30-40 posts daily, and say they like what they do. If you look at the address on their profiles, seems they have been making good money .
|
|
|
|
|
Quickseller, I am sure you read the reply on the top of the page, where I pointed out various things in your trust rating. Any reason , why aren't you replying on the thread regarding that ?
|
|
|
|
Even though he tried to extortion money, I was looking at the account history. And It does seem what he says is true. Both accounts are from Serbia pureelite and Joca97 , and the message posted in op do point out further that they are alts. But he is wrong about the ban evasion as it existed before, however one more thing I have doubt about.
Any updates by mods who can chime and tell if this is allowed on the forum . Replying back to your own posts ? I couldn't find it defined in the rules anywhere. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
