I *think* I went with Cardiff's and Edinburgh (and Connacht too) I don't usually bet in a match having a tie, so I probably got a refund on that one.

In the "other" football I've started putting win and draw bets down with mixed results.

I couldn't have put it better myself, @holydarkness

I'll have to check which I put money on later (by rights I should be using my mobile while I'm on the road) I used the last of my funds in the TAB account to place where on round one of the NRL 2024 season which kicks off on the 2nd of March 2024...

Because...

Within three hours of the NRL announcing the roster of matches for 2024, the TAB.com.au we site had posted round one match ups with money having already been put down by the time I spotted it, so I put my standard weekly bets in. (Seven out of eight picks are the favoured teams while theres what I thought would be an obvious pick which other punters didn't think so.

I'll talk about them again in four weeks time.

After that, I went over to my nitrobetting.eu crypto account and put some bets down on a couple of rugby games (these two you mentioned didn't ring any bells).

Usually, motels have various extra channels, so I'm hoping to catch some games live. 🥴

Yes, it was great to see someone else's work.  (I imagined those slats to be either a window, or, where the poker chips are seated by the croupier).

---

---

just a slight nit pick, did you sign cryto or crypto I confess, I can't tell.

@RTR~ - no newbies or Junior Members (please read the first post)

Have you invited anyone who facilitates loans to participate in this thread?

If it ever came out that GT was acting outside of their obligation by The Court to act on behalf of the Cryptopia members then I'm sure The Courts would take a dim, dark view of that outcome and act accordingly.

Be honest for a change - this is hardly a Democracy with the current owner able to make changes at a whim without consolation (think removal of scammer tag or the introduction of merits) - the "employees" (paid or otherwise) are able to modify posts (e.g. merge two) or arbitrarily remove or nuke a user without consolation while one admin/mod will be unable to make a judgement call so leave for another who will (unban or act on a report).

In a true democracy all sides will sit down and discuss an issue, but what are you trying to do?  Silence anyone who has a view or opinion that differs from your own.

---

---

Democracy you say?

A simpler solution is to not give loans to *anyone* unless they provide collateral of a minimum of 125% in a similar disposable crypto.

I'm less inclined to support a flag if the lender hasn't secured collateral.

FIFY


Yeh about that - you should have vetted The Sceptical Chymist' 3000+ trust feedback (as I did) before encouraging him to rejoin the DT lottery his trust feedbacks are primarily a mixture of note book anecdotes or similar to my ONE trust feedback you are all agonizing over.   Check them out, they don't conform to your own instructions.

By rights on your yard arm he should be "~" by you.


Even you seem to fail to grasp the nuances of DT1

---

---

You can't chant "do as I say, not do as I do" then have the gall to complain if I review my trust feedbacks according to your demands.

There was an eerily quick follow up email by GT which bordered on rambling followed by a second email from the above essentially reiterating the offer.

IN A NUTSHELL (their words, not mine):  are owed less than $500 in dust - take the offer.  Are owed more than $500 in crypto, take your chances with GT who are (again, their words) draining the funds with their fees.

GT are attending court as we speak.

Correct. (As yahoo already knows): Archive [a.t] [w.a.o]


And I'm not finished - had you continued scrolling, you might have noticed all of the negatives have been *rewritten* verbatim leaving just a mixture of neutral and positives pre-this week - next up are the neutrals to be rewritten verbatim.  The positives can stay as is to give context as to when they were first issued.  (that doesn't mean I'm finished with them, rather they have been grouped (or will be grouped) together - subject to further review)

The OP is again playing the victim knowing full well the original trust feedback was posted on the quoted date (yet he's just waited until now to burst into tears) - IIRC he even made mention of it in one of his previous grandstanding threads.

But thanks OP for going on the record as saying of the 137 negative (and overall 443 trust feedbacks) that is the ONLY trust feedback that you consider to be incorrect.  (that's less than a quarter of one percent)

---

---

OTOH Feedback is correct:

I don't trust the OP and wouldn't do a trade with the OP.

They changed their OP:


A little bit of scrutiny goes a long way...

76 - Timelord2067

Regards,

I've just seen in my notes there was also a connected UID TeamJamal [B.o] who was ^{Last Active:    April 09, 2018, 03:07:25 PM} [a.t] [w.a.o]

while Zapo [B.o] [a.t] [w.a.o] was created ^{Date Registered:    April 08, 2018, 09:42:24 PM} some 18 hours earlier.

Yes, I've always heard good things about Connacht so I thought I'd go with them.  I'll have to be more mindful of Edinburgh as the weeks go on.

...  Ah well, Maybe next week.

Congrats Matt - you picked the bulls eye!

True, but the three threads get bogged down in discussions at one point concerning when ownership transfer occurrs.


After consideration, I've amended my previous trust feedback to now read:


Feel free to point out if this (or any) are wrong.

Indirectly it does. 

I've been reviewing (yet again  ) my trust feedbacks to ensure they are accurate and saw both names and noticed the two connections.

Sorry to necro bump this, but the My Apology to Bitcoin Community and Request for another Chance thread started by jamalaezaz is locked and the aTriz account has most likely changed hands thread started by Cashi was last active 2018-10-04

My question is if aTriz and jamalaezaz are alts, does that mean Zapo is jamalaezaz ?  There are no Flags against Zapo and the two aforementioned threads aren't clear about the co-ownership.