And again some payouts are 'overlooked', waiting 5 days now  How long??  |
|
|
|
I had their banner on my website at www.bitcoinpunter.com but removed it as soon as I saw this thread. To think I might have sent some poor innocent there.  |
|
|
|
I got as far as this: Bitcoin lacks the essential attributes that are needed to support a widely recognized transactional currency. If Bitcoin was allowed to proliferate as a currency it would produce greater economic uncertainty, reduced trade and lower individual standard of living.
That was enough for me. The man is a clown. He goes on to say: I predict that Bitcoin will trade for under $10 a share by the first half of 2014, single digit pricing reflecting its option value as a pure commodity play. Miners/speculators will be best served to acknowledge the meltdown has begun, act quickly and take fleeting profit off the table.
|
|
|
|
I got as far as this: Bitcoin lacks the essential attributes that are needed to support a widely recognized transactional currency. If Bitcoin was allowed to proliferate as a currency it would produce greater economic uncertainty, reduced trade and lower individual standard of living.
That was enough for me. The man is a clown. |
|
|
|
It's quite simple really. Buy low, sell high!  |
|
|
|
Issue resolved. Thanks a lot.  |
|
|
|
Still can't get on the site man. When I tried to contact support I got this! Fatal error: Call to a member function getID() on a non-object in /home/bbc/public_html/module/support/index.php on line 16 |
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I thought you'd email me.
Just answered your private message.
|
|
|
|
Site came back 10 minutes ago and when I tried to log in it said my saved password was wrong! So I applied for another password, got it instantly and it's saying that's wrong too! Hacked?  It seems that just your account has this problem. I send you another new password in a second. Still waiting. |
|
|
|
Site came back 10 minutes ago and when I tried to log in it said my saved password was wrong! So I applied for another password, got it instantly and it's saying that's wrong too! Hacked? |
|
|
|
I've just had my 11th losing soccer bet in a row at your site man. The place is cursed.  |
|
|
|
|
I have accounts with Bitbook, Bitcoinlivebets, Cloudbet and Anonibet.
If any one of them is down, I just use one of the other three.
Simple.
|
|
|
|
Sent pm + email yesterday. No replies yet. Poor customer support
Strange....their customer support is second to none normally. |
|
|
|
On the other hand the BitBet operators are strictly following contracts between themselves, shareholders, and bettors.
The action that creates a valid Bitcoin transaction is called a signature for a reason. In this case snackman signed a transaction to a recipient who had already GPG signed a contract with shareholders describing exactly how this situation would be handled.
As has already been said, a FAQ is not a contract and users should not have to read an entire FAQ to make sure they don't get swindled by gotchas. FAQs are for when people have questions (which are frequently asked), not mandatory reading. A terms and conditions that are presented or clearly linked to on each bet page would be a different story. Better yet would be an actual contract. Snackman signed a transaction, not a contract. And even then, contracts don't make swindling acceptable. Also I don't understand why the recipient (bitbet in this case) signing a contract with shareholders has anything to do with how they handle customers. They still have an obligation to treat customers honestly and fairly. If part of their deal with shareholders was that they would accept user deposits and then one day close down and run away with those deposits, it wouldn't excuse that behavior. I get that bitcoin is caveat emptor, and one could fault snackman for not being careful about vetting BitBet and going over their policies with a fine-tooth comb before he sent them money. That doesn't make what BitBet did alright, and snackman is now doing the right thing by warning others about BitBet's unscrupulous practices. Personally, I like to see people get their wealth through voluntary trade and ethical behavior, and there's nothing ethical or voluntary about advertising a betting service and then confiscating a bet without delivering any service simply because of a cockeyed policy buried in a FAQ. Far and away the best post in this whole thread. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
