|
Your skype name: act.myname
trans link:c7466cb34da88986992521b44888bf69e2abd2fbf3a9dd7f7107e89774513f38
|
|
|
|
|
Reddit username: actmyname
Sharkoin username: actmyname
|
|
|
|
Hey boy now listen,
Trust rating is only to save people being scammed. Yes what you have done is a trust abuse. Trust system has only been made to protect people from scamming.
Hey boy now listen, If this is the case, then your negative feedback on our profiles means that you consider us scammers, is that correct? You presumed that we were scammers because we left a negative trust rating on your profile because of your ban evasion. Is this logical? If I had to scam then you would have never seen me working hard for signature campaign.
Of course my several accounts have been banned and the only reason was the quality of posts.
Working hard you say? You mean... working hard enough to be banned for poor post quality? And for that jail stuff, yes everything is possible. Make a plastic surgery, change your name and welcome to the earth. Hope this time the society will not judge you instantly. Meanwhile did you notice one thing, the guy might have been jailed for the wrong reason(a case of fault by police). So you should take your time judging others.
Of course my several accounts have been banned and the only reason was the quality of posts.
You admit that you have been banned multiple times due to the quality of your posts and yet you still think that you deserve a second (fifth?) chance. Do we allow thieves to continue stealing again and again only to pardon them? It's right for criminals to assume new identities and continue doing the same as they were before? The problem with you guys is that you judge people too early. I don't think that there can be anything to argue about ban evasion. This was not judged too early. This was probably judged too soon. |
|
|
|
|
betking.io actmyname/123258
|
|
|
|
THE SIGNATURE CAMPAIGN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MAIN WEBSITE. THOSE POOR POSTERS ARE PAID TO POST POSITIVES DAILY.
I'M TALKING ABOUT THE PROVABLY FAIR SYSTEM - WHICH IS A LIE
IT IS PROBABLE SCAM
Still no proof and you choose to ignore me. This may be the whole Russell's teapot falacy, but it's still your problem to show proper proof. At any point, I can also create a thread stating "bitcointalk.org is a scam" without any proof posting in all caps, but would that really be believable? Would anyone truly think what I was saying was legitimate? No.
You "don't like scammers!" but it seems that you can't even prove anything to be a scam. It's your job to do the research and present it clearly (and preferably concisely). |
|
|
|
Sure I will.
Well I have already done it. Lutpin and Lauda you two guys are responsible for negative trust without any valid scamming reason. If I am a trust abuser, so are you two.
Wrong. You have provided negative trust for the reason of "trust abuse". In what way have our feedbacks been false? You yourself have admitted that you have currently banned accounts, and therefore are evading a ban. I do not trust you because of that. If you are banned for whatever reason in a real-world location, would you be able to assume a new identity and then simply go back in there? That's simply illogical. The same thing applies here.
Remember the previous analogy to prison: if you are given a jail sentence of life, you cannot simply walk out and get a new name. It simply doesn't work that way. The trust we have given you is justified in that matter. In fact, you should even be banned right now. What is your justification? |
|
|
|
|
Username: actmyname
Bitcoin Address: 1ActBTCi5XUMjqnyFxVWgSfE5xWicj8g3o
|
|
|
|
actmyname=72 Another day, another lottery! Good luck to everyone participating (though I hope I win  ) |
|
|
|
This is a gamble site, where you have to bet any amount, if you bet on a woman for example 0.01 btc and hopefully another player bet the child and if the child wins the win is the double prize and the bettor who bet the woman Can try to win by applying the method of the martingale always when the bettor of child exceeds the amount that the woman and if she wins the bet of woman can return to the base to win again and that is good because it has security and is managed to Through blocks of blockchain to be a fair game
Address 19Kxbqkxe62ex5UhMoUsjWoddVpq7Jw5Eq
Firstly, you did not post this on the main thread. Secondly, your Google Translate attempt at a reply could be improved. Learn to write proper English, given that this promotion isn't in your local forum.
Also, what are you even talking about with martingale? |
|
|
|
|
An Apple TV as collateral? Why not just pawn it off, you dingus? Unless... (no, it's too unlikely to happen, especially for newbies!) you're a scammer!
Get out of here.
TLDR; it's a scam, avoid
In reality, those who have that amount to freely lend to someone are probably smart enough to keep it away from scammers.
|
|
|
|
THE SCAM CONTINUES QUOTE FROM THEIR THREAD Congrats to user FB for being the 2nd VIP 5 user and claiming his 1btc prize. We are gonna keep the bounties rollin.
First to reach VIP lvl 6: 1 BTC
First to reach VIP lvl 7: 3 BTC
First to reach VIP lvl 8: 10 BTC
First to reach VIP lvl 9: 20 BTC
First to reach VIP lvl 10: 30 BTC
this is completely ontop of the bonus you get anyway to reach the levels THEY CREATED A FAKE USER "FB" AND THEY BET LARGE AMOUNTS FROM IT TO ATTRACT NEW VICTIMS THAT USER "FB" GET ALL THE VIP REWARDS ALL OTHER USERS LOSE THEIR BITCOINS. PS I DONT PLAY ON THAT SCAM WEBSITE JUST SPOTTING THEM Got any proof or are you still just spouting bullshit? Your behind must be jealous The onus is on you to show us that FB is a fake user, and that BitDouble.io is scamming users. Innocent until proven guilty, alright? |
|
|
|
coinig has some problems with newline characters IIRC; I verified it with Bitcoin Core. Everything seems to be proper here. |
|
|
|
Like always just a lie nothing more.
Like a ponzi, ain't that right? But you'd know all about that, wouldn't you? No negative trust accounts are allowed. So, even if you wanted it, you wouldn't be able to have it. |
|
|
|
betking.io actmyname/123258 What men ? Multi accounts ? Sorry but me not multy accounts men , you give me 1 mbtc for faucet , i repay you 2 mbtc men ... Please, me not multy accounts men .. # edit http://prnt.sc/dcdwul # I repay you 2 mbtc , i not play again at betking Thanks See, why would you do that if you were innocent? Come on.Good going catching alts, Dean! |
|
|
|
There are 870 playing people at present and near the promotion it would be 1000 people. it's very unlikely for wining this price you should revise the rules.
I haven't played in bitsler yet but i 'll try this one.
What? Why should the rules be changed just because an individual's odds are low? Should the lottery odds be changed since millions of people play it? No. So why should this be any different? Besides, I don't really think there should be complaints about a promotion - it makes bets very +ev during a small period. |
|
|
|
Wouldn't it be a little unfair odds-based when you have someone who's bet 1 BTC vs someone who's bet 0.1 BTC, and if the 0.1 BTC gambler wins, they are returned 1 BTC?
Although it would be the fault of the 1 BTC gambler (I mean, how stupid would you have to be to not put down the minimum if the prize is uncontested?) it would be fairer if a partial amount were returned to the original person should they lose.
i think that is the thrill, by that, some players will send their bets to the small pot side so they can win more so the pot will increase continuously But like I stated, most likely normally nobody would really dump a huge bet when their return is much smaller - or if they're the first to go, they would likely prop down the minimum bet then see where it takes them. However, since this event would be astronomically rare, I would think that the ruling should be this: You're awarded a portion of the losing side's pot based on your % of your side's pot. This is static and does not change. What does change however is how much the losing side will return to the winning side - the losing side should only return an amount up to the winning side's pot. Say for example the losing side bet 1 BTC but the winning side has a total of 0.5 BTC. The losing side gives the winning side 0.5 BTC in total but is returned the remainder. The returns should also be proportional (with a minimum threshold, say 0.0005 BTC) |
|
|
|
lower than the guy that sent like 15 btc in fees!
How about this one, with a 200 BTC fee?I didn't want to show the BitClub transaction because that one has some controversy behind it.
thank you very much OP for this thread, i am very sorry for your lost, but i learned good things from it.
i wish you to solve your problems and return your lost money
good luck
Seems like OP resolved their problems. I made a bet on their site and their transaction fee during the return was 0.0002 BTC. https://blockchain.info/tx/333c560e0022e8ae5b514223bcb0e3e4c2436164b5ffee8c606c6d3413dfa6a6Likely, the issue was that since OP is using an automated system to return bets and the minimum bet size is 0.0005, they might be operating at a very negative ev, despite the house edge. |
|
|
|
Red trust doesn't always make someone a scammer, it shows that the person leaving the feedback doesn't trust the person recieving it. Lutpin has made his reasoning clear for the red mark in his feedback, as did Lauda.
Would you trust someone that spams and ban evades, along with little trustworthy things to their name?
In addition, would you not consider somebody delivering a sub-par product for what you pay to be scamming? In that case, signature spamming and getting paid is scamming the owner.
Really ? Then why do you think I was given the name of trust abuser when I did same ? This is not something personal here . Because that negative feedback had no justifiable reason behind it and therefore was abusing the system. Retaliatory feedback is usually a big no-no. And all I can say for you is RIP english .
You're not in any place to insult anyone else's literacy. Then why is he insulting and advising about what he has got no clue ? Irrelevant, and you were the one who had ignored everything Bitcoinsummoner had said to only reply with "RIP english". Certainly, someone has no clue, and it's not them. And that goes along with the fact that you use poor grammar and spelling so you're in no position to begin insulting other people's English skills. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
