Bravo! But in the sincerity of my experience, this must be in rare cases unless you are not referring to this forum. It happens both ways as there are some casinos that will be easily sided and exonerated but there are even more complainers that win the casinos. Some cases were resolved, while others were never resolved even as most casinos were unable to prove their guiltlessness.

Owning to this, contrary to your claim, since I started reading cases between casinos and the customers, I give it 10%/90% won cases in the format of casino/complainers. Regardless, I advise everyone to start or continue their casino's journey with a casino with a good track record. This is the only way to avoid issues like this.

Your response reminds me of the thread I recently replied to where the guy complained that a well-known casino did not allow him to complete the KYC despite being willing to do so at the earliest time possible. This got me discouraged and I don't know the best advice to issue in this regard anymore. But truly, if a casino can allow you to complete the KYC as early as possible, it is the best thing to do to avoid a later issue.

As for the withdrawal, I think many of them are still very flexible about it, if you are not the type that wins too much or withdraws a huge amount of money, grace may still cover you to delay the KYC, otherwise, it's good you prepare for the worst. Nevertheless, I learned from you today about more deposit than withdrawal plans of casinos, well, it's certainly an unfair practice and I don't believe any serious regulator will allow that. This is why they ensure that companies are well-capitalised before beginning operation, so there is no good reason for that practice in a sane clime.

This is not a matter of being unable to satisfy anyone but for casinos to do the needful and be fair in their operations. At the worst, they should be flexible about the KYC and be reasonable unlike what the main OP experienced. I've never questioned a casino for asking for the KYC completion but I definitely see it awkward to disallow a person willing to do it. What possibly could go wrong if someone completes his KYC earlier? There must be an ulterior motive here.

I agree with you, but why? That is the question we should be particular about in this kind of arrangement.

You need to be careful with this liquidation heatmap of a thing as it's a mere way to know the market liquidation in adjustment with the prevailing liquidity. I've seen many claiming it's so useful in trading/investment and for other functions but I disagree with that trading/investment part because it's as good as you are watching your real-time chart with no basis for analysis.

The best is for you to learn how to analyse the market through technical, fundamental and sentimental approaches, other ways like this will only confuse you as their sole purpose is not designed to tell you where the market is heading but to know the economics around the market.

Time has passed and things are changing in the crypto world, for this, I advise you not to expect anything as usual. I was one of those who were expecting the altcoin seasons but with my deeper thoughts, I discovered that some altcoins continue to behave similarly to that of the altcoin season since 2023 in their own huge and little way (manipulation or not).

This might mean that the system has changed and can't be as general as many expect due to some liquidity issues in the crypto market. It's not that the market is not gaining liquidity but crypto projects are too many now for liquidity to cover many of them in such a way that they will behave like before.

By the way, who is going to bring in the huge liquidity that will make many altcoins move 10, 20, or 30 times their current price as before? We should be realistic with the current market events.

It's easier said than done, though I have so much trust for Bitcoin judging by the history it has recorded so far. But the context is not about me or any other experienced traders/investors but someone who is not even a newbie yet. The OP is still trying to convince the lady, so it can't be as simple as you think if the plan is not working as expected.

As the OP explained it, it could be scary if she planned to try Bitcoin investment for some months for instance and bought it at $70,000 and met Bitcoin lower than that level on the maturity date. Imagine those who bought Bitcoin close to the peak in 2021, won't they panic years after? That is why we should be careful in issuing investment advice for people which was my main point in the first post.

Complete or not, what I know is that Trump is selling what people want to hear to them and they are falling for it pretty fast not considering that the power to do most of those things lies with the Congress and not Trump himself.

This is a serious allegation that I'm sure you can't prove, one of the misinformation we are preaching against on the internet. How could you even say that? Don't you know it's a huge indictment to any company doing that? Not to mention that so many of the owners of the most popular social media platforms are not in support of the Democratic party, especially Elon Musk who owns X and has unwavering support for Trump.

Your friend is right, crypto investment is risky and you should not force her, I love investment to be voluntary. If you push her too much and she invests and things turn south, it will be catastrophic for you because she never wanted it. After all, you are not the one earning/risking money, so forget it and invest if you so desire, perhaps your success may convince her.

As you can gain from cryptocurrency, you can lose as well, and this is irrespective of whether you know it better, at times our results are lucky, nevertheless, expertise is equally important. As I write now, I have some crypto investments doing so well, just like I have some that are doing so badly to the point that some are /4 in loss. This means that if it's $1,000 I invested, I now have $250 in them, that's how risky cryptocurrency is. Now tell me, if your friend is in my situation, how would she feel?

No, it's not possible, the US dollar can't be backed by Bitcoin, but Bitcoin can on the other hand be backed by the USD which is senior and has witnessed centuries that Bitcoin has never witnessed. Also, the US dollar is linked to the strongest economy in the world, what is Bitcoin linked to? So don't let us even go there.

Trump is everywhere now, I hope we will rest soon. But I love the way you are not a bigot about this and it's true that politicians can't be trusted, of which Trump will be one of the worst when it comes to sincerity. Was the CBDC possible during Biden's administration, did they even push it, why is Trump lousy about it?

Let's assume that he made good his intention if elected, for how long, won't another government take over after 4 years, so why is he acting as if he will be the US president forever? People should be wise.

As for the advantage of CBDC, there will be wider access to the USD globally. But the disadvantage is that it will kill many financial services.

No, Bitcoin will not be better and may not be negatively affected either because CBDC is centralised and Bitcoin is decentralised, they serve different purposes.

Well, I will not speak for one addiction over the other since negative addictions will always be bad irrespective of the magnitude. But I like to still point out that what we do for the money is different from what we do in line with our body and direct health. Our body may be calling for the p*rn and it is difficult to resist since it's tantamount to you calling yourself, the body is strong. But I don't see it the same way in gambling as desperation is the main reason for the negative addiction in it, stop the desperation and you will be healed of gambling.

Therefore, I rely on this ground to say that stopping gambling addiction is easier than stopping p*rn addiction as one is externally calling (you gamble outside the body) while the other is internally calling (p*orn has a direct effect on your body and health).

You're just being sarcastic in your whole narration, the world is divided financially and will remain like that forever. There exist the rich, the average and the poor, although it could be further divided to make it reflect the true living standard of people, notwithstanding, this is the division that could be basic for understanding it. Many people can not afford a single quality meal in a day and you are saying the world is rich? While some people can conveniently feed 5,000 people daily, how even is that?

This shows the high level of financial imbalance in the world and more reason why the rich are becoming richer and the poor people are becoming poorer. Many factors contribute to this which could be the country, the environment within the country, inheritance, natural talent and creativity among other factors.

You can see that we are not equally blessed both by nature and by the family/clime we found ourselves, and so is our affordability of needs and wants (living standard).

All the above checklists are important before pulling the market trigger and I must tell you that I do all these and even more. Dailyfx is an old FX site whose information can't be taken for granted, I respect it a lot, it should be more than 2 decades in existence now. However, I would also like if they could add the point in which the trader asks himself whether he was acting based on emotion or not for psychological evaluation before confirming the trade. This is because no matter the checklists and plans you have, if emotion creeps in, your efforts will be futile.

Thanks for at least letting people know about these opportunities, but at the same time, I think I'm done with all these games and airdrops that are earning little money for us with huge stress and some annoying tasks attached to them. Some will never pay even as many will take almost a year (if not more) to finalise the payment, it has always been one promise over the other.

Besides, as you listed them with many attached to the ZBD wallet, don't you think something is fishy? I wonder why it must be earned and transferred to the ZBD wallet which is also an app for similar programs like games, surveys etc.

Hahaha...bro, what I mentioned was not in any defence related, the defence was faulty, so Kim Cheatle's resignation could be appropriate, but that is not the point. The point is whether Trump is sincere about the bullet wounds and the speculation of Bitcoiners around the incidents which often appears to be false. About the wound, what if a sharp object pierced him during the commotion? Many experts mentioned that as a possibility and Trump never submitted himself for an official verification, it's about him and his medical experts. Can't they cover things up? Where is the government's official report about it?

As for Bitcoin jumping higher due to Trump's speech, that is a lie, this doesn't happen all the time, except for some insignificant few moments that could be coincidental with other events. I've noticed that many of you do not understand this, the market has been a rollercoaster for a while now. What if US economic news was released at the same time he was delivering speeches? That coincidence often eludes you guys since many of you do not know where to verify the economic data. And if your points were to be valid since Trump is leading, why is Bitcoin falling presently? Maybe we should start from there.

I'm surprised you asked this question if I must be plain with you. As the coherence of the post is, the external sources are those outside your reach, unlike your immediate circles, like friends, relatives and others. They are the ones you can do Bitcoin transactions with and will not even know you ever existed after completing it.

This is common with P2P and other exchange platforms.

Bro, cool down a bit, hyping will not change anything, let's be practical and constructive, after all, I am also a fan of cryptocurrency, but what I will not do is deceive myself like many of you. No one is saying cryptocurrency is not popular or not a voice to reckon with, but I will always maintain that the percentage of its adopters in the US will still not be a deciding factor in the US election.

If Trump becomes the president today, it's certainly not the crypto mantra that delivered that to me as many factors contribute to the US president winning. These factors include cryptocurrency but the importance of it will always be lower than many other pressing factors. You can't say that 21% (the percentage of the US crypto adopters) of the US population will win the election simply because they adopt cryptocurrency.

Even among the 21%, many of them will be ineligible to vote and among those who are eligible, many may not be crypto bigots as you believed. If you do the arithmetic, you might realise that less than 10% may vote for Trump because of cryptocurrency, which is still very low to win an election.

Let's admit a constructive fact and not noise!

Thank you for the way you pointed this out maturely, and yes I read it and my response mustn't always be in the favour of the position of the OP. My only fault is that I never acknowledged you were right with your former replies because the compounding was in my head. And just as the OP concluded in his post, he was open to the view of people about it and my view is that we should not be afraid to compound (what he mistaken for rollover).

For me, it's emotional and not cost-effective to withdraw our money every time we win, it shows our weak minds and lack of preparedness for gambling in the first place. Also, compounding has its advantages as I compound my earnings every time and it has helped me to better work on my gambling psychology as nothing is aggressive in my gambling anymore since my mind is not on the money like before.

The issue I have with most users replying to my posts is that they do not read to understand, what you are dragging has already been covered in the first paragraph if you can read it insightfully. No one is saying you should not labour, and of course, if you did not labour, how do you earn? But I was saying that labour will never "guarantee" wealth as there are successful and unsuccessful labour, while smart work crowns it all to make wealth.

Take the forum as the simplest example, some users put in their best efforts but never earn as much as the merits earned by many who did lower than them. Didn't they labour more with less result and didn't those favoured laboured less but with a better result? This is practical and is the same in real life, it is not about how smart, intelligent or hard-working you are, you may put all your efforts into it and still achieve a little in your entire life. This can only mean that it's not all labour that brings wealth, but the smart and productive ones may bring wealth. And how labour is being productive is left to you (labour), your fate and luck, not the labour alone.

No one is saying casinos do not have their requirements and this can even be different from the generally known ones at times, but still, what you view as not absurd is actually absurd to me, casinos can't be treating me unfairly with bad conditions and expect me to stay when I have an alternative that will treat me better. And in case you did not understand it well, this is not about a bonus requirement but your own money. It's insane to wager x5 of my money before I can withdraw it and I wonder why you think it's normal in this competitive world.

I've experienced worse than that with some bonus requirements, which is fine, but it's also the reason I do not give in to bonuses anymore. My real money has to come with some respect because it's not free and this is why I take my time these days to read the Ts&Cs of casinos before dealing with them.

You made me smile when I was reading your post as it has already been covered by what you replied to in my previous post above. As seen with the lines I highlighted, you would realise that I never stopped at using the long years of the casino as an entire factor to accept them, but one of the factors even as I added some other factors and also emphasised that they can't be trusted 100% simply because they've been operated for long.

Nevertheless, the long years of existence of casinos is a very good criterion we should not take for granted regardless of the few bad ones among them like the 1xbit you quoted. We can quote the likes of Stake as the best example in this context, and such a long-standing casino factor has helped me to avoid being scammed in the gambling world. So, I am never going to advise people against what I do and let them suffer the fate most gamblers suffer in the hands of new casinos.