|
Is the rollover requirement to be able to withdraw your initial deposit or just the bonus. A bonus should be optional if it locks your entire balance.
|
|
|
|
That's unfortunate to hear, hopefully this can still be resolved favorably. Given that there are numerous accusations against this website, I fear that might not be the case unfortunately. I'd suggest reposting this in scam accusations with a bit more information if you want to warn others/have a better chance of recovering your funds. |
|
|
|
https://angel.co/joshua-mutual-gold-fundDoesn't look like this has been around since 1933, especially since it seems you are the founder? I find it a bit hard to believe you have $8 billion in assets to be honest.
|
|
|
|
|
Will we be seeing a similar program on the Btctalk forums any time soon?
|
|
|
|
|
You're supposed to have an end date for an auction, otherwise you should move this from the auction section.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting article, although it seems a bit hypothetical. How is it related to your first paragraph? Are you accusing those sites of defrauding you through this practice? Do they prevent you from choosing hi or low? Are there any gambling websites that prevent you from making this choice?
|
|
|
|
Good idea, but how does this differ from Mitchell's list? He generally keeps it pretty up to date, so I don't think this is really necessary. |
|
|
|
There's positives and negatives to self-modding threads. Self-modding is a good tool to keep trolls and shady competitors out of your business, but these days it's mostly being abused by scammers, sadly. With that being said, users locking threads are usually huge red flags of scammers and tell me who I need to stay away from.
I think we should probably consider restricting who can actually self-mod threads though and removing this feature from lower ranks would help. As I mentioned in another thread on the same topic, we should also maybe consider that once somebody locks a topic in the marketplace it cannot be unlocked by anyone other than staff because locking a thread to prevent warnings from even being posted is also being utilised by these scammers and is another huge red flag.
Suggestion
Only members and above can make Self-moderation topics
I think this is a viable solution. Generally speaking, higher ranked members who use self-moderation use it for legitimate reasons. Perhaps self-moderation could be another perk of Copper membership for new members? Those who have invested a non-trivial amount of money into their accounts probably won't abuse it either. |
|
|
|
|
Looks like there's a hero slot open according to the spreadsheet, I would like to apply.
Username/UID: MadZ/174480
Bitcointalk Rank: Hero
Current number of posts: 481
Bitcoin Address to send the payment: 1Dx1ykGbAJ2Hdaqi6UKvzo1gU2uBD9H3gm
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe I'm missing something, but what does the guarantor get out of this arrangement? Does the would-be victim pay a fee for this service, similar to an insurance premium?
|
|
|
|
|
Are these interest free? Been wanting to try out the new website, but moving coins is so painful with these fee's.
|
|
|
|
do you guys know why the site shutdown?
I just looked into the post and saw really great reviews on the first page.
Was curious how it shutdown.
I do not think it was profitable for them. They did not offer anything new or better than primedice and primedice was already well established site. oh so this explains why i can't load the site anymore ;( sad, it says im currently open an unsecure site, lol LOL how could you find this site and try to open it while it is very old inactive thread? The OP is also not active anymore, I think you should not even try to open any sites where they have no active representative on this forum. Agreed the last active post was supposed to be in December 16, 2016 and looking at OP he has been red trusted which he was last active back in March 12, 2016. It may be running under a new name though so better bet on only trusted gambling sites in order to protect your Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies from potential fraud. This should be locked lol. This site was pure copy of primedice.com They did not scam anybody i think so the owner just decided to close it which is not that bad from his side. To be fair, it's not exactly easy to promote a website here when you've had negative trust since the beginning. That being said, if you don't want negative trust you probably shouldn't use a clearly purchased account and rip off another website's design. Still, at least the owner didn't run off, as far as I remember. |
|
|
|
Perhaps I missed it in the article, but these hands were played online, not live, right?
Also, I think it's pretty interesting that it wasn't until the 30k hand mark that the AI started to become consistently profitable, and it wasn't until 80k hands played that this profitably was statistically greater than 0. I think this suggests that the AI's ability to win isn't from some sort fundamentally better strategy against all opppnents, rather, its improved ability to learn from opponents and exploit them over a large sample size. This bot can't just sit down at a random online table and start crushing, which is a good thing.
Yeah, it may well be so for the first time, but after a few months of continuous playing the AI should be able to squash all competition at once, at the first game. It is basically the same with chess, though AI doesn't seem to be used there so much. Chess bots use, for example, opening and endgame databases so they don't need to play every game from a cold start, so to speak. This roughly corresponds to the level of AI "expertise" in playing poker acquired after a number of games. This is what we humans call experience. True, it seems from the article that the AI also improved in performance against other AI over time. One thing I will say is that I'm sure the players' knowledge that they were playing against an AI probably had some influence on their playstyle. Whether that means playing tighter or more aggressively, I'm not sure, but I know I'd play differently against an AI than a human opponent (probably more aggressively, since you have much less fold equity against bad players who will call with marginal hands, and I doubt an AI would do this). Regardless, I wonder if the results would be the same if players were unaware their opponent wasn't human. |
|
|
|
|
Generous offer, are you charging interest for these loans? Hopefully people don't abuse this, but I have a feeling 90% of the requests you get won't be from the "amazing" part of the Bitcointalk community.
|
|
|
|
Interesting stuff, any reason you removed it? Hope that doesn't mean the campaign is cancelled haha  I distinctly remember PrimeDice's campaign when I first joined the forums a whole 4 years ago, good to see it coming back. Will definitely consider joining if it's long term, one of the few websites I place a high degree of trust in and would feel good about advertising. |
|
|
|
|
To begin with, I understand that this forum does not moderate scams- scammers are not banned and the only recourse for doing so is through user-generated feedback. While the trust system helps a great deal in warning users about which trades should be dealt with caution, I think more can be done to warn those who aren't as savvy.
As much as I admire this laissez-faire policy when it comes to trading, I don't think it would impinge too much on users' freedom if the ability to self-moderate threads posted in the Marketplace section was removed. To me, this is the equivalent of being able to curate your feedback- something you would only want to do if you have something to hide. If you look at which threads are self-moderated, I think this trend is pretty clear. Most users' first instinct when they're scammed is to post in the scammer's thread warning others. Unless they're in other users' trust networks, this warning is usually more visible than any feedback they might leave on the offender's profile.
Hopefully the staff will consider making this change. I don't believe it would be a hard one to implement, and I can't think of any significant negative repercussions it would have.
|
|
|
|
|
That's unfortunate, I guess there's not much more you can do about it. I'm sure potential trading partners will at least take note that the feedback is very old. Out of curiousity, why did you refuse to use escrow? I don't think I or anyone else would want to trade first with someone who has no reputation, I'm sure you would agree.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps I missed it in the article, but these hands were played online, not live, right?
Also, I think it's pretty interesting that it wasn't until the 30k hand mark that the AI started to become consistently profitable, and it wasn't until 80k hands played that this profitably was statistically greater than 0. I think this suggests that the AI's ability to win isn't from some sort fundamentally better strategy against all opppnents, rather, its improved ability to learn from opponents and exploit them over a large sample size. This bot can't just sit down at a random online table and start crushing, which is a good thing.
|
|
|
|
|
You've mentioned you tried contacting him. Was that recently or around when he left you the feedback? I'd shoot him a quick PM if it wasn't recently, if I was him and you're polite about it, I would consider removing it after more than 2 years.
|
|
|
|
PM'd you about something |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
