Thank you... we all try in our own ways to contribute to the forum 

I think posting and re-posting their flags and negative trust is the least we can do because every day newbies are signing up to register in the forum and they are being exposed to scam after scam and eventually they will fall victim to one.

I concur, many newbies could have avoided becoming victims if they have read the threads or had simply carried out due-diligence beforehand. Having said that I do not accept every scam allegation against the 1xbit scammers is genuine.

It seems a small number of users making allegations against 1xbit are probably trolls, attention seekers and those that are looking for a payout therefore each allegation should be judged on an individual basis. If I am not shown any verifiable evidence 1xbit scammed a user then I will not back their claim.

Thank you for the information. Can you provide a link for where Royse777 made those comments apart from in the OP?

You are factually incorrect on several fronts.... my emotions never got in any way of anything related to Bitlucy therefore you are clutching at straws and are trying misdirection tactics.

Let us be clear, it was you who created this mess with Bitlucy therefore why should I be making myself feel better? I was not a part of it, all I did was point out that I left negative trust for you long before your outburst therefore accusations of bias should not be levelled at me yet you take the opportunity to post incoherent ramblings.

Where have I asked others join me and exactly what would they be joining for? You are in serious need of a reality check.

You are right when using the single-slip analogy, I cannot argue with that advice. I hope others read it and take heed too.

After reading your walls of text, it seems mostly created by you with a view to garner sympathy for yourself, it is easy to miss parts or not remember others. Having said that, I asked a question if a dinner took place and asked for clarification and did not establish my thoughts.

What would have been the harm if you replied stating you used the word hangout when you should have instead elaborated fully what you interpreted that word to mean considering the circumstances and what was at stake.

What would have been the problem is you had simply provided a link? It was this same type of aggressive yet nonsensical behaviour akin to a tantrum that has alienated some members.

Good news you are keeping this thread unlocked.

Since it will not be locked now, I would like to take the opportunity to go back to something yahoo62278 asked about before you started your conspiracy theories.

I partially defended your reasons for not wanting to show blockchain transactions between yourself and Bitlucy on the basis of you maybe having some reasons however his questions and concerns in the post below are valid therefore maybe you should at least consider providing some blockchain transactions as evidence to show you are not connected to Bitlucy far more than some are suggesting or thinking: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5403679.msg60500366#msg60500366

Even if they do not end up gambling with real money at that particular website or using that app, there is a serious danger they would end up gambling with real money elsewhere.

Maybe you are right these apps attract people that have not gambled before but earlier in the thread it was being discussed about the impact these apps would have on gambling addicts and/or reformed gamblers.

Arsenal suffered a monumental collapse at the end of last season which saw Tottenham leapfrog them for the final champions league place. With Manchester United out of the way because of poor form and Tottenham behind on points, Arsenal had a clear run to clinch the 4th and final champions league place but they suffered a horrible end of the season with bad results.

With just 3 games remaining their back to back away losses 3-0 at Tottenham and their 2-0 loss at Newcastle sealed their fate in 5th place and Europa League football. Had they beaten Tottenham they would have finished in 4th place instead.

If I was to choose between Arsenal or Spurs finishing higher, I would choose Spurs.

First, where is the link showing comments from FortuneJack stating the reasons they cancelled bets #2, #3 and #4 on the basis they were identical to bet#1?

Second, (without showing screenshots) in simple English can you confirm the amounts wagered and the winnings expected, or edit them from the following list:

bet#1 = €4750 @ 20.48 = €92,500
bet#2 = €495   @ 20.48 = €9642
bet#3 = €4750 @ 19.84 = €89,490
bet#4 = €500   @20.42  = €9710

Third, what was total amount you wagered in all the bets that you are disputing? According to what is in bold above the amount totals €10,495. Is this correct?

Fourth, according to what is in bold above the winnings amount to €201,342. Is this correct?

Fifth, if you are claiming €201,342 but you received €92,500 + the wagered €4750 totalling €97,250 from bet#1 along with €495, €4750 and €500 wagers on bets#2, #3 and #4 then things become clearer. That means you are claiming you were scammed out of €104,092. Is this correct?

I read some of what you wrote about data vanishing along with you stating what FortuneJack should and should not do but keeping all that and their ToS for a moment aside, can you confirm if the above is correct.

I do not know what happened in this case but am trying to understand.

I cannot be sure but I think I posted maybe once in one of your threads related to this issue and cannot be sure what I wrote. I am trying to read up to understand what you state happened, what FortuneJack say happened and what actually happened. It will take time and even then there might not be full clarity.

I must add I am very disappointed in the way you get aggressive and post with a lot of frustration instead engaging with members (who agree or disagree with your version of events) in an acceptable manner. What did you achieve by alienating the FortuneJack representative to the degree they made their final comment on the subject matter?

If you on one hand are taunting them making it clear you do not want them to make any more comments then why are posting in the forum seeking support? The logical thing to have done would be for you to keep them in the conversation because ultimately they are the ones who could (if they chose to) make any payment to you in the event they accept liability for an error. From what I read thus far they do not accept liability, they claim they did not scam you.

The Curaçao Gaming Control Board does not seem like it will do anything to give you an outcome you want. You also have mentioned AskGamblers and stated they are effectively useless with you even resorting to profanities against them therefore it is safe to assume you believe you will not be assisted by any group or association in what you feel is improper conduct by FortuneJack.

As mentioned, I need to read up on this to understand what happened but assuming what I wrote above is accurate, what would be an acceptable outcome for you?

Your flag has far more opposition than it does support, it has no momentum and you seem to have zero chance of FortuneJack accepting liability for your claimed losses and they have already said they will make no more comments regarding this case and you have welcomed that by telling them you do not want them to come back to post about it.

Therefore keeping your stance in mind:  what do you hope to achieve by posting about your allegations in the forum?

Well here how I think how the top 6 teams in will stand in order at the end of the 22/23 season  

Manchester City
Chelsea
Liverpool
Manchester United
-----
Tottenham Hotspur
Arsenal
-----

I think Liverpool will suffer without Mane but ten Hag will have a positive impact at Manchester United. At the same time Tuchel will try to elevate Chelsea to another level.

Was this ever actually addressed by Royse777? Was a straight answer ever posted addressing this issue about the dinner? If so, can anybody provide a link before Royse777 locks this thread.

Was there an actual in-person dinner between Royse777 and Bitlucy where they met or was it an online chat only. I am confused, did they ever meet in real life to discuss Bitlucy as a business? Were they actually friends in real life or was this specifically a cyber friendship where the two main protagonists never met in real life?

Hard-push advertising is common everywhere in all walks of daily life but subtle influences most definitely would have an impact too especially in a community such as this forum because some members are more likely to send funds to an unknown website if they trust the person promoting that agenda. That is simple to understand.

Again you raised another valid point.... based on who is recommending the casino or betting website, it is likely to influence the decision made by either experienced or novice individuals.

If a forum member had -20 feedback was recommending this-is-a-great-casino-website.com I doubt it was gain much traction beyond zero but if a member with some sort of reputation was to recommend or vouch for this-is-a-great-website-i-can-vouch-for-it-because-i-am-promoting-it-and-maybe-am-a-part-owner-look-at-my-forum-reputation-and-do-not-miss-out.com then even if was not blatant promoting rather it was subtle, it can have an affect on any member ranging from gullible to experienced covering all in between.

Some say that incident was akin to Royse777 being fooled/duped by a scammer in Bitlucy whereas others say it was mismanagement and negligence.

I never thought about it the way the you described it as leveraging their own reputation on a single deal for their own benefit. Come to think of it, there is nothing wrong with that assumption because from a particular vantage point it seems to be true.

It seems Royse777 hedged all bets (no pun intended) on Bitlucy but lost and in the process a small number of users became victims. Not pulling the plug and not disassociating herself from Bitlucy earlier when red flags were visible was negligent on part of Royse777.

Such as a football manager having to go (be sacked) even though he is not on the field kicking the ball but has to carry the consequences of the outfield players because he is responsible or part responsible for their actions? I see part of the analogy.

Thank you. I try to remain impartial, I try to not let sentiment sway me and I am glad to be on board because this community means a lot to me  

For clarity sake I should express I am surprised at the amount of good faith, pity, sympathy and compassion shown here by members towards Royse777. After looking at the facts as I saw them much earlier, I had a degree of sympathy too but that has subsided because of the way Royse777 has posted with an offensive aggressive stance which resulted in alienating herself from several members including myself but my red tag was given impartially before that happened.

As a forum member, my trust list (included and excluded) is there for all to see but that does not mean I would literally trust all of them beyond this forum and even within this forum we all define "trust" according to our interpretations rather than how theymos wanted it to be defined. We all apply the trust and exclusion and feedback system in ways some others would find incorrect. Even those that added me and others to their trust list would probably not really trust me and others outside this forum... a continuation of trust from inside the forum to outside it, is something not afforded easily.

Even some of those staunchest of trust-advocates that have not added me to their trust list or excluded me (some citing I am too hasty leaving negative tags as their reason, others have their own reasons or agendas) have themselves left highly dubious or factually incorrect negative tags for others thus contradicting themselves but I have tried to remain focused on the responsibility I have in conducting myself as a responsible member of this community. Others conduct their own responsibilities in the forum how they deem appropriate, there are no wrongs or rights, it is about interpretation.

Having said that, I would personally outside this forum trust just 3-4 members at maximum on my list literally and again I would define trust in the way I interpret. Regardless, I would not be influenced at all by reputations nor be bothered about falling foul of certain cliques, I would say what has to be said because I believe it to be the right thing... maybe that was part of the reason you made that comment about me using words such as strict, consistent and integrity.

Can you define what you mean by Royse777 lied about the dinner and provide a link?

I have to say this is somewhat of a draconian law if it goes to these lengths to control the freedom of choice where their adult citizens opt to gamble. They know VPNs are used to bypass such regulations thus making their attempts to limit access almost a failure, yet they still maintain their stance.

This thread deserves to have the images above posted at least once in every page in order to highlight the potential pitfalls and dangers to any potential victim. It is of no surprise the reason why the 1xbit scammers are continuing their operations is because they are obviously having success while doing it.

All are advised again to keep well away from the 1xbit scammers others you will probably end up getting scammed sooner or later.

I am not surprised you think the 4-0 result is not going to change anything. Do you think Liverpool will be as successful as their pervious two seasons without Mane?

I think Ruud van Nistelrooy was the player that was most effective going from PSV Eindhoven to Manchester United and cementing his place there as an out-and-out goalscorer.

Also, Il Fenomeno (the great Ronaldo Luís Nazário de Lima) went from PSV to Barcelona in 1996 for world record fee at the time where he stayed just one season but scored 34 goals in 37 league appearances with a total of 47 goals in 49 appearances.

The news reports I read were about Tuchel ruling himself and Chelsea out of signing Ronaldo on the basis of the player having too much media attention and that would upset the balance of the team with him having the spotlight to himself.

Chelsea have purchased Sterling for around £50 million, when Chelsea can attract players of that calibre it means they will try to be the premier league winners, they do not want to settle for third place but they have not signed anybody else.

Yes it is a good idea to keep everything in context.

I hope it will not be a two horse race for the championship between Manchester City and Liverpool. And if there are more than six teams teams trying to get one of the four champions leagues places it will be a good season.

Liverpool used 21 substitutes and Manchester United used 11 substitutes. Liverpool could have hit the post 50 times it still would not change the result, they were outplayed and were hammered 4-0 by a team that has a new manager and is considered to be in trouble.

Most of the Liverpool first team players (Salah, van Dijk, Robertson, Arnold, Fabinho, Konate, Thiago, Keita and Nunez) came on the pitch in the 61st minute therefore even with 30 minutes of the game to be played they failed to score yet still conceded another goal in the 76th minute. There are no excuses here, Liverpool were awful because Manchester United stopped them by playing an attacking type of football Liverpool could not handle.

Last season Liverpool were far superior of the two but this is a new season and Liverpool will have to prove they are far superior of the two... thus far they have not proven anything except they were beaten 4-0. We can make a decision which team is superior based on results and style when the season starts.

I think Manchester United should end the season in the top 4, they have got rid of problem players such as Pogba and can start bringing in a blend of youth with experience. Going by how they dismantled Liverpool they will not fear playing any team.

Ronaldo did not travel with the Manchester United to Thailand and now the team has arrived in Australia as part of their tour but he is absent on compassionate grounds but in many media reports attributed to insiders, they say he wants to move because he wants to play in the champions league not in the Europa league.

What was the question you asked that resulted in Sofia mentioning the Compliance Manager? And what was is that Sofia was meaning when stating the words "you will be contacted directly once we have a final decision"?

This is the link in question: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5404614.msg60553143#msg60553143

Result from the pre-season friendly game played yesterday in Bangkok, Thailand:

Manchester United 4-0 Liverpool





Even though this was a friendly game between the Premier League giants, Liverpool will not hold the psychological edge when they meet in the premier league on 22nd August because under ten Hag they seem to effective going forward, the opposite of what was happening when Rangnick was their temporary manager. There is a balance of experience and fearless youth in this Manchester United squad.

Liverpool ended up finishing the game using van Dijk, Salah, Konate, Fabinho, Thiago, Robertson, Keita and all the main players but they lost 0-4.

I think Sadio Mane will be missed by Liverpool, he was a huge presence in the dressing room and on the pitch for them and their performances will suffer this season because even with the acquisitions they have made this season they will be unable to replace such as iconic figure immediately. Liverpool will be a weaker team without Mane whereas Manchester United already so bad last season cannot get any worse and the only direction for them is up.

It is not just about the danger of having identities stolen when websites get hacked.... it is also about the danger about people sending their ID to front websites, those types of websites that are deemed to be genuine but their whole premise is to gather as much information as possible from gullible members that sign up to their services. That information (ID) will then be sold on to other criminal gangs for nefarious purposes.

If the big news you will be making within the next 48 hours is going to put Rocketpot in a negative shade or show them in a negative light then it might be better for them to contact you beforehand.

I still honestly believe Rocketpot is a one-man-band and maybe Sofia is just a pseudonym being used to create the illusion of a customer support team but if the Rocketpot owner really wants to pay you but is effectively insolvent but he is trying to use incoming funds to divert to your payments then he should be allowed time to do it. If that is what is happening then it cannot negate a red tag on the profile of their forum representative but maybe that is not what is happening.

Patience is the key here, they have made it clear they are awaiting confirmation from the game provider to state that you won without cheating. If I were you I would be very unhappy at the delays in them communicating effectively too but does their ToS (or Terms and Conditions) mention the time they require between a user winning and them ascertaining from the game provider that no cheating took place?

Thank you icopress 

Am I right in thinking the deadline for posting the review is 17th July?

The 1xit.com website shows maintenance:




The 1xbit1.com website shows their website in working order with the same copy and paste drama unfolding under a different URL:

I mentioned in the past about their claim to be protected by law but when I asked which jurisdiction any litigation would take place in the event a victim wanted justice..... unsurprisingly, 1xbit refused to reply with a specific to-the-point answer 

No, they do not have a gambling licence from any country, they have no gambling licence from any jurisdiction not even from Curacao.

This really was an interesting thread because of the subject matter but after trolls and signature spammers started doing what they do, the thread has somewhat derailed. Gambling with fake money as an alternative to help those with gambling addictions defeats the object of trying to rehabilitate those in trouble.

The 1xbit scammers work on a multitude of levels to scam their own users therefore it is not surprising to read they did it again. What is somewhat surprising though is that people such as you fail to heed to warning signs that so many of us putting out there in the hope of stopping new victims being created.

There are cases where members have not been scammed but the way they operate it seems inevitable they will do it, such is their reputation in this forum. If you claim is accurate then you are another number in a long list of victims, sadly.