This is very good advice that can help any potential gambler quickly in selecting one of the best casinos in the industry. This forum is a refined place for any gambler to select rightly as the members of this forum tell the truth about casinos and also frown at and fight for gamblers who are wrongly cheated by any casino. Due to the influence of this forum, many staff of casinos have been forced to help with some discrepancies between the casinos' and the customers, so it is an added advantage. However, the intending gamblers should be careful at the same time, it is not all of the casinos advertised here that can be trusted.

This is why I implore the person to choose from the ones that have minimal complaints in the forum, while a big name is also a very good plus here. Also, those casinos that have been working with the forum for a long time without any interruption are the best to be trusted if I must say and Stake is a good example.

He can actually use "hiding" because gambling is kinda stereotypical in many climes and you can blame the society but the irresponsibility of many gamblers. Many are too idiotic with gambling and have wasted their fortuned to it, so the wide scope of view is why some people might actually be hiding. Also, some irresponsible gamblers themselves who are already addicted to it could be hiding after much advice from people despite it affecting their lives. These are the two most important reasons why gamblers could hide, while the third could be for personal reasons. Some people are just introverts and private personalities, they hate people knowing whatever they are doing even if they are the most responsible person on the planet earth. To them, they will always prefer to play in their closet, but for me, we can't particularly call this hiding, it's just their preference.

I just voted for Usyk and my preferences are based on personal sentiment and unbiased speculation. It was personal due to the fact that I do not like Fury, oh yes, I dislike a lousy mouth and an arrogant person. And as we all know, Usyk despite possessing all the qualities and belts he has, is a humble person, which is why I naturally support him.

For the second part which is based on true speculation, well, by virtue of the fight between Anthony Joshua and Usyk where the latter beat him twice and Anthony Joshua easily beat Francis Ngannou which was difficult for Fury to beat means a whole lot. If we do the arithmetic, we should know that the odds still support Usyk in this regard even though it's not the only factor that will determine this fight, nevertheless, it still counts so much.

You have good points my friend, and I do not even see much reason for this if we can be attentive to the two words; Trading and Gambling as they do not mean the same thing. However, if the two  (casino and broker) are fair in dispensing their services, then there will never be an issue. After all, we all know what we are signing for when we want to trade either of them, and for a trader not to gamble or gamblers not to trade means they understand what they are doing at least if they are adults. Needless to say, these establishments established them basically for the purpose of making money and anyhow they can make the money is important to them regardless of what it will cost the trader or gambler. So, it is we who should go for what we are comfortable with whether they are extorting us or not.

Regardless, if it is about the ease of making money on the part of the customer/client, trading has it, and the same goes for the sincerity in the operation of the core service of the two establishments (trading still has it). Most brokers these days are only intermediaries unlike before when some brokers will be internally creating the market themselves (market makers). For this, they only earn from the spreads, swaps and commissions which I know is fair enough for the service they always render, even as they have employees and experts to pay.

These days, no matter when you start a business, you may be multiple times more successful than those that you met doing it. You can draw a very good point from what we see around us now, marketing drives business and the economy pretty well and fast. And by saying marketing, the digital market has it more, it spreads the news of your company like a virus and before you know it, you might not need so much marketing in a few years after due to the success already achieved. By then, the casino would have been well-known and if the service is good, people will naturally be organically recommending it even without the knowledge of the casino itself. This is why casinos are targeting every place possible in the digital space so that more audiences will be reached out to until it gets to the level of reducing their marketing cost or changing the marketing preference when they are already established.

This costs a whole lot of money even as the most aggressive approach proves to have achieved the best results. Nonetheless, it is good to add good service to this, because if too many complaints are being witnessed by the company, it is only a matter of time before the customer base that has been achieved by their marketing style will become reduced and the customers turned their back on them. This is when you will now see those companies who had previously reduced their marketing being aggressive about it again. So the marketing and the quality service must agree positively to help any casino.

For me, the offline and online casinos contest is not the issue here but the sincerity of the operators of the casinos. Even in what the OP narrated, it shows that the casino is operating online as well but has an agent which I believe is a franchisement agreement. This doesn't stop anyone from betting on their online platforms as well if need be, so it is about our choice and I have many of them in my country. But sadly, it is the fault of the agent in this situation but it could be the fault of the casino company itself in other situations, it doesn't matter. We often read about casino fraud and cheating which is directly linked to the company itself on a daily basis so there is no peculiarity here.

However, we should carefully study and research about where we play, and the person who wants to bet on the games that will earn big cash out should carefully know where to do that to avoid issues like this. If the casino agents are not the big ones, they could be greedy, and it could be worse in the situation where you win more money which could buy their structure and the equipment many times over, they could disappear due to this. Also, it is good to gamble with casinos that have big and good names, by doing that, you will unlikely be swindled by the company itself if you are dealing with them directly.

You are right about this and that's if the list in the OP is even correct anymore, some of them might have become KYC compliant as we speak, except for the hardened ones that can even steal from you if care is not taken. Some planned their casino in a very crooked way just because they do not want to be answerable to any authority, and the question is whether anyone will be willing to work with such casinos simply because they are no-KYC. I can't do that.

That said, some will continue to advertise the no-KYC mantra but indeed request KYC from their customers, but those customers are selected, or should I say targetted. They could target them due to many reasons which include their good quality of playing, how often they withdraw and their current withdrawal size. If some or all of these are peculiar to the gambler and the casino could be asking for KYC, such should know that something is fishy, and the best is to run as far as your leg could take you.

I've never been a fan of no-KYC casinos and never will I be as the risk is high for me.

The newbie who is lucky enough not to rush into gambling but learn to know the rudiments and the dos and don'ts of it is indeed lucky. But such must be willing and able to actualise what he learned so that he knows the go area and no-go area in gambling to avoid issues that are commonly associated with it. This can also help the gambler to know the difference between gambling for fun and gambling for the money, and also know the issues attached to the two of them.

Gambling is such that is also risky, for this, the gambler will know the importance of plans and management in it, even as such a gambler knows how to control himself. What I am trying to say is actually about the entire preparedness of the gambler and I do not think this can be shortchanged for anything when it comes to the success and preservation attached to it.

Finally, unless the new gambler has as been well thought about the risks and the success possibilities attached to gambling, and is also fully aware of the ways to go about it, to make his account and self well-managed is now misbehaving to the point that he is addicted or got aggressive, desperate and frustrated due to it, then such is a big fool. Because "Before warn is before armed." So why the lapses?

5 years is enough years to build trust but when the gambler is not making a reasonable amount of money but losing with them, he may never know the sincerity and the integrity of the casino. Well, this is not the first time that BC.Game has been called out on this forum, but recently, they seem to be more serious about attending to issues like this and I believe yours will be resolved as well. The $10,000 is not a small amount of money and asking you for their KYC is not the issue, it is their right, but your not being able to submit your documents is the issue.

However, I've witnessed such issues before which is not even to the awareness of the company, and it might also be a general issue on their website/platform at that time. For this, you can't conclude that you've been scammed yet, you need to contact their support for help. And if the casino is a good company, they will always have alternative channels where you can send the documents if direct sending becomes an issue. This is certainly not a big issue unless they are hiding something.

This is hilarious and should I say I did not expect it because anyone who thinks he or she can base their casino's preference on bonuses and perks will certainly find him or herself in a hot soup in most cases. If that is the basis, then most of the new and worse casinos will win the gambler easily, and to what end? To the end that you deposit your money, and dedicate your time, energy and money to wager, but in the end, they refuse to honour your withdrawal request. So what is the gain of such a gambler? What the casino is offering me as extras like bonuses and their promotions are the least of my concerns, I do not even go for any bonus in my sports betting account, and I make sure that I segregate the account used for betting on sports from that of casino for proper management and accountability.

This is because of the ugly experiences I've had regarding the bonuses, it is just a means to tie your hand in most cases, the terms and conditions are overbearing and too demanding to me. Since I mean real business in my sports betting unlike my casino betting, I better ignore it so that I have a full say on my money. Also, the best things to look for in casinos, in my opinion, are the UI & UX, which could entail all the services of the casino, including their support and security. Other things are secondary, which could even be to lure the customers into their company.

Well, people are the reason why others are investing in Bitcoin because if they never tried it to tell the good news about it, others may never know the opportunities in it not to mention of spreading it on social media and other outlets for others to know. This means that it should come first from people regardless of what we believe and there is nothing we can do about it. But the good advice is that we should not be a blind follower of anything, which includes Bitcoin, we should investigate them, learn them and find the means to manage our risks regarding them. This is why we always advise that everyone should do their own reached and never be too trusting. A lot of people who knew nothing about Bitcoin introduced their friends and families to it, but to what end? Loss and mismanagement!

They will definitely mismanage their way into it and lose since they never prepared for it but will only start complaining later. But the instinct, I do not agree with you, do not gamble your investments with instincts, you should know it, be a good speculator and manager, and most importantly, every investor needs to be the friend of their trading chart.

This is not true and it seems you even wrote the opposite of what is happening on the forum. First, we should know that the traffic of the forum can't be static or the same at all times, it has to be dynamic, and just like the market charts are displaying, so is the trend of the forum activities. It is normal that there will be times of increasing traffic and there will be times of decreasing traffic, but on average, the forum still maintains a very good reputation traffic-wise. As for the factor, fewer topics are not being posted as you alleged, and as a matter of fact, there are more topics, and they are interesting ones which I often see daily. There are also low, medium and high-ranking members who are active, so I do not know where you are getting your metrics on this matter.

However, for me, the two most important reasons are the inability of some users to join a campaign. They might reduce their gambling activities due to that until they are again fixed somewhere. And the lack of will is the second. The second part might sound funny, but when the average of those who lack the will to post is high, it becomes obvious, especially if the happenings on the forum bore them at a point. This is not coordinated but could be coincidental to have such an effect.

No doubt, like any other asset, Bitcoin has helped to hedge against inflation in the past, but with the current status of the coin, I do not think it would be easy anymore. Take for instance, if you buy Bitcoin at $65,000 and the inflation in your country bites to the point that the goods you want to buy or the service you want to purchase has truly skyrocketed to at least 4 times as it is currently happening in my country, whereas Bitcoin could only move to $125,000. What do you do? This obviously cannot hedge the inflation, but as an investment, if it moves higher for at least a reasonable degree, it will still help the person to limit the effect of the inflation and it depends on the performance of Bitcoin at the time.

And I must advise you, do not invest in Bitcoin simply because of its past history, it may fail you and a good investment warning forbids that. You should invest in it because you believe in it, that's better in case anything bad happens. Bitcoin enjoyed its low price then and the early investors were so lucky, but at this time when the price is somewhat high, extreme care is needed to avoid issues.

I think you are mixing things up here, trading more doesn't put our trading account in jeopardy unless we are mismanaging our trading account. The plan could be faulty, if not, one can do whatever they like when the market is strongly trending up or down. What matters is for the trader to know the right striking level and time and the exiting level at the same time, and also know the right money and risk management to use at that point in time so that the view that the market is bullish and smoothly trending will not cloud our judgement. The market is funny and the one you see seriously trending up for hours and that has moved 250 pips steadily could suddenly reverse sharply downwards with more than 350 pips depending on the factor that caused it. For this, serious traders will always be ever ready even as the safety of our trading accounts should be the top priority and not the expected earning itself.

That's a nice reminder and I do not know anyone conversant with Bitcointalk who will still slack in that regard, or else, such a person will regret it. The fact that Binance even has issues with my country has made me almost completely stop working with it, but for other exchanges and centralised systems, my cautious approach with them since they merely "owe" me the amount with them and not a guaranteed arrangement has ever made me careful in dealing with them.

However, there is no way this sentencing will ever affect Binance in any way, it is now under new management and the operation of the exchange continues to run smoothly after CZ excused himself as the CEO months back, which will not be different now. But what pains me is that the sentence is too little regardless of whether he pleads guilty or not, the 4 months will soon pass.

This will continue to embolden these rich guys to launder money, so what's the point?

Well, what I can understand from the guy is that the 262,500 Satoshis mentioned could be misleading as used in the context. This is why I think you misplaced it for $262,500 Bitcoin value judging by the inability of people to hold on till that level is reached, as indicated in your remarks. Correct me if I am wrong though.

The 262,500 Satoshis is a small amount, maybe he was trying to advise that people may at least be buying such in worse cases which I agree with as well. But it is good to know that good investors should know the right time to invest and divest, no one should be dumb investors just for the love of Bitcoin. Bitcoin investment is all about the making of the money therein, and the smart ones would make it better. Imagine those who bought Bitcoin at $5,500 for example and liquidated it at $65,000 to rebuy it again in 2022 at $20,000.

We do not need a soothsayer to tell us that such a fellow would have gained multiples more than the person who bought at the same price but never liquidated it to buy again in 2022. That is the smart part of an investment which many are not considering, but instead perceive those who practice it as a weak investor. Now tell me, who is weaker or smarter between the two?

I've always said that it is not about the leverage but the risk taken through it, and even if you are planning to trade with some risks, you should be planning to trade with some management that will be able to counter the excessive negative effect of the risks. This is why I appreciate what you wrote here. As an experienced trader myself, I know the value of minimizing our risks, and if someone can down it low to the level of 1-2% then it is a very good bargain that will most likely not affect the trader. Because such will not lose his money so easily, and when the trading strategy of the trader is good, it will be another opportunity to overpower the market squarely to the advantage of the trader.

Also, the use of support and resistance to place the trade is so important in minimising the risk exposure. You can't compare the person who bought an asset at about 100 pips above its support level with the person who bought it barely 5 pips above it, the latter is the better trader who is being cautious with the risk management and the account safety. Nonetheless, one should also ensure that the support and resistance strategies they use are strong enough for this task, this is where many traders miss it and not the managerial plan itself. I use trendline, price action and the peak and bottom of candlesticks to actualise it.

Thank you for sharing, but the market doesn't work that way and I must equally say that just as I expected this to unfold after the US SEC's ETF approval, many other people knew that many other countries would follow, so it's not a big deal for the market anymore. Even Ethereum's ETF approval in the US will no more impact the crypto market the way the Bitcoin ETF filling and the drama surrounding it made the market behave at that time. That's the market psychology, it has priced in the ETF effect in the crypto space regardless of the country or asset showing interest.

That aside, the US market is a world-renowned market that can't be taken lightly, but unfortunately, the Australian market is not, which is why the effect will be minimal. The USD is being paired with all the assets of the world which makes it so important in the financial market in relation to the country itself (the US) that is strong in everything. By virtue, anything related to the US and USD is often important to the market. But a faint of such is applicable to a few top-world countries like the UK and EU, they have a sizable impact on the market as well, but so little compared to that of the US. This is even as they are more impactful in the market than Australia's effect. Are you getting the point?

This is based on my experience with the financial market and I majorly drew this from the reaction of the US news in the financial market and how all assets react with it compared to the news of other countries. In summary, I expect little or no effect on the crypto market due to the Australian ETF news.

Are you telling me you did not invest at all because your narration is not clear in that regard compared to your conclusion? If so, then you must have followed the steps of another person wrongly, so you are at fault. As an adult, we need to be able to decide for ourselves, but the moment we are following the steps of other people, we could be negatively affected or miss opportunities just like you did now. Well, it is a lesson to you, nonetheless, if you are still not lacking investment/business, then you are still exonerated, since it doesn't matter the channel at which the money is entering your pocket.

By that, I mean whether you invested in Bitcoin or other things, it doesn't matter, so long as the money is being made and not allowing our spare money to be wasted in the bank, it's good. But if you miss entirely, then you are at fault. During my missed days which I still regret a bit till today, I was still engaging in other investment activities, so I never missed entirely as it is not a must it should be Bitcoin I should be dealing with. Except that if it were to be Bitcoin then, I would have made more money, that's just the difference in my case, so no serious hurt feelings.

You still repeated the same statement, and at this point, I do not know whose side you are. Is it the casino/business side or the humanitarian side? If you are a concerned person, you will always choose the healed world/humanitarian first over anything else including the business. You are looking at the core goal of casinos and the relationship with the customers, but overlooking the damage it can cause to some people who could be a victim of it. Fine, gambling is an adult activity and people, including the government and casinos expect it to be played by mature and well-prepared people. I have also preached that many times. But at the same time, we are all humans, we can't be wise/smart or think the same way and even some younger people may be more mature in handling themselves and things of life better than some older ones.

Look around you, are people the same? It is not everybody that is smart or can think for themselves or control/restrain themselves in some situations. This is why some external restrictive features like self-exclusion were put in place instead for some gamblers to be wasting their lives and fortunes away due to addiction which they can't control. Do you think that these addicted gamblers would want it for themselves if they were with their senses or able to correct the issue? This is why that feature is important, but the only issue is that it is not so effective, nevertheless, it has helped some people for real.

Now, effective or not, advocating its abolishment is not humane, it shows you do not care about anybody, that's what I was telling you, it's wrong. Who cares about more bonuses and offerings when a life is wasting off due to addiction? The self-exclusion feature is still an effort to help even as the addicts continue to find other lasting solutions to their problems.