I think you missed the part where they confirmed that they don't have a script to calculate the hash? Perhaps on the first screenshot? Given your first and third are the same one [the chronology hinted that the order of the screenshot is as what I posted below and what's missing should be the first one. Can you please reupload that part of the conversation?



Edit: adding the first image

Yes, they know, that's basically what's being discussed here, that the site copied the original one. And no, it didn't work that way, sending private keys or password. They change the address you wrote on the message with their own, thus the fund sent by the recipient of the message will actually arrived at the scammer's wallet instead of the original message owner.

By this logic, OP's situation actually didn't favor him, because the rule has been established for around two years, and I think OP made his account only recently, thus signed up when the rules has been changed.



I noticed OP was not returned online both on this forum or on CG to address the development of the situation. I wonder if he finally did the KYC and got his account reinstated.

As other said, please upload the screenshots as evidence, it'll help to build a basis of your case. Meanwhile, this part caught my attention,


what exactly do you mean by uploaded a wrong picture for KYC? Like you mistakenly upload your friend's photo instead of yours? How?

The fake one is an ad, they paid some amount to google so their site can be shown on the top most result. Since google did not filter out scammers, it's a very common practice used by crypto scammers and phishing site to rob their victim. This is why crypto users, especially mixer users, are... ehm, I mean are-but-soon-will-be-were always encouraged to consult to the forum before they deal with a site they found on google search result, since scammers use this trick very often.

May I suggest we also ask for GekkeBelg's input? He's quite... vocal on the gambling section, and I think his first hand experience on this refund plan can be trusted, given he had submitted his request around a month ago.

Gekke, did you get anything yet?

Updating you both with the aforementioned case of Vainica, in case you both did not follow the thread and thus missed the follow-up I just made. The case was closed [verdict: rejected] by the request of the OP. With this, I think there's currently no more active case against BC.

OP, sorry to have a quite OOT post.

Just want to update everyone who follow and overseeing this case, OP raised his complaint to CG and... ask it to be rejected. I'm honestly confused, he raised a complaint, every conversation was made private by his request, and then he ask the case to be closed rejected. There's nothing we can learn from that CG's thread, literally.

Anyway, I think by that outcome on CG, it's safe to say that this case is also resolved.

They already do this, requiring more than 0 confirmation to process the transaction... except for ripple and cardano. For BTC, they require 3 confirmations. I guess this issue came because of the congestion and OP tried to rebroadcast the transaction and accidentally considered as a double spend.


https://bitcasino.io/help-center/help-your-transactions/how-is-my-transaction-confirmed-

In a way, yes, this is the same "double spend" on blockchain, the suspect send some fund into the casino and to other platform with the same token. Usually platforms have countermeasure for this by requiring some confirmations before crediting the account with the fund.

OP, did you send them during congestion? Did you rebroadcast your transaction or something like that?

Yet. Not on a campaign yet.

But that's his ultimate goal, to regain his lost on Rollbit through signature campaign, so I guess the aim was to chase merit to rank-up. I was overseeing his case v. rollbit from the beginning, so I'm kinda familiar with the case [not with the deal, though, I think it's made behind the screen?].

And yes, been watching him since he firstly emerge on this forum, I have to say that his choice of boards are rather... uncanny for a newbie, so does several of his posts.

Perhaps you're talking about this one? It's a case where a player deposit during a bitcoin congestion, which pretty much the same as current situation. That case seems to be solved with Steve of Sportsbet [the case was with SB] asked for the account to be re-checked, given OP of the thread didn't update their complaint.

I think he's leaning more toward trying to stir the pot for mixers instead of looking for attention. He targetted mixers in general as his initial complaint, "clueless" about the platform that become the issue here, maybe tried to fish other people pitching in with negative experience of their own, pushed to mention specific platform and has no choice but to name one just to keep his story sounds reliable. And when confronted with his growing number of discrepancies, he pull the whole Avatar Aang move.

It was fun toying with him, though.

Meanwhile, the fact that he has not logged in, I think it's because he also follow and read this thread from his other account. Realizing that his attempt to raise a ruckus failed, he didn't bother to go back online with that account.

You didn't read the other posts before this, do you? The guessing game is finished, CM came out as the winning platform that became the scapegoat... err, I mean the villain in this story.

Eh? But they do have the right to "punish" those who break the local laws being mentioned above, it's part of their compliance, and it's been stated on the Tos that the user agreed, that they acknowledge they are not underaga, nor accessing from restricted country.

It was CM. Quite funny... umm, I mean sad, isn't it? With all of those precaution he made, and he failed to consult to the FAQ which link was literaly at the bottom of CM's page. If only we know why OP bother to send 7 USD and concerned for the privacy of that amount.

OMG!!! I'm glad we can zero it in!!! Yeaiii...!!!

It's all thanks to your big effort to dig waybackmachine [certainly because you didn't know that every posts in this forum is archived by a dedicated website], and probably some luck is being involved here, that you browse in mobile that you notice the date of the edit, because if you use desktop, you'll have to hover to the date of the post to know when did a post got edited, most likely not something a newbie will notice.

But, alas! If only you did the same effort you did now to dig that name as before when you tried to mix your coin, you'll notice the minimum amount to be mixed was specifically informed on the FAQ, just mere clicks away. Seems like a wasted effort, is it not? You spent time to look for the legitimacy of mixer, use disposable email, mask every trace, etc. to ensure your privacy, but you ultimately stumbled upon a problem just because of something that can be discovered in less than thirty seconds. Ackk...



What were you thinking at that time, anyway? Sending 7 USD? You must be in a rush? Ohh, you're a silly, silly one, aren't you? You put a big sweet-as-sugar smile in me with your clumsiness, you even did not notice the minimum amount, although you've check that thread last year during your research, and it mentioned that info?

Granted, many casino probably use KYC to turn a situation in their favor, most likely perhaps small and questionable casino [I think this one included]. But bigger ones mostly use them fairly, to identify someone and prevent further abuse by tying an identity to some findings [IP, username, etc.]

Though I can't recall the name and the detail of the case [I think it's rollbit?], I remember there was a case where a casino refund user's deposit because he refused to do KYC. Not the winnings, as that'll defeat the purpose of the KYC/AML, like Pmalek said, but I think it's kinda fair that they returned the original fund.

As for why they didn't enforce KYC from the very beginning, one casino explained that they're always threading between legal compliance imposed into them by the govt. and the privacy of their user. Thus, they didn't enforce it until it's necessary, mostly when a ToS is brached, for the purpose explained above, and/or large sum of fund is being involved.

Nope, Mixy is not the only one. The criteria where it has something similar to "money" and had advertised here but no longer did so was also shared by WW, and WW should make more sense, given it have more massive campaign and logically reached wider audience. But nope, not WW. And should not be mixy either, as OP already gave this thread a read [it has list of mixers] and none rings a bell, and the thread has mixy on its list.

Right, OP? None of the mixer on that list, or anyone suggested here sounds familiar? Including any on this list suggested by NotATether? But it's not important anymore, is it? You're not really interested to know their name anymore, are you?

Umm... yeah, I understand this, what I am failed to understand is the logic behind it. I can understand if OP tried to cut some corners if he's limited by some resources [fund, builder, marketing staffs, etc.], but given he got all that he needs, and since it's his dream business, I think it will be better to build everything by himself, both for security reason as JG said [the backdoor and malicious code] or from the creative side of the design itself [template given by them are likely similar to other site, thus raise less confidence in customers.

Sorry OP, didn't try to be rude, or to pour any salt [and rubbing alcohol] to your wound, just... speaking my mind.

Anyway, do you mind presenting the evidence and, perhaps, edit the opening post with the format as the bottom of this post, so we can start taking proper action? You can move the current opening post into the "additional notes" section.