On a funny side-note, Dean has a locked thread and yet somehow miraculously new accounts keep managing to post in the minutes it's unlocked before Dean locks it again! 

But it's pretty great when Dean uses one of his shill-accounts, and then you can see their post history:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1025632

rofl.

I kind of feel bad for bitdice.me, I wonder how many shill accounts Dean has used to claim funds 

It's certainly possible he's broke, but there's no way that happened without him misappropriating funds. Like for him to have no money, it means he managed to lose:

a) His own money [Ok, fine. Who doesn't like hookers and blow, and it's his to waste ]
b) Bankroll investor money [Ok, fine. I'm willing to suspend disbelieve and accept there was a bug in which someone knew the server and won the server seed]

but more dubiously:

c) ICO investor money [wtf, I've run a far bigger site than Deans. There's no way he would've even put a dent in the raised funds, even with its low volumes it should've been turning a mild profit]

and then last, completely unexplainable:

d) Player balance funds [in fact, Dean has yet to even comment on how this is even possible. That's how outrageous it is]


----

I knew there was something wrong when Dean kept bugging me to buy his ICO tokens, and I expressed concern about him canceling the buy-backs. Dean kept saying that it was impossible, and I pointed out there could even be external events that made it impossible such as bitcoin price gaping down. Dean then tried to assure me that it was impossible, because he "systems in place" to automatically sell bitcoin if the price fell such that it would risk his ability to do the buy-backs.

That was the moment I knew there was something seriously wrong. It was clearly bullshit, no one in crypto is going to keep their funds on an exchange with auto-sell orders. Like c'mon. I bit my tongue and politely refused, but I knew there was something brewing and warned a few people to be careful. Then very shortly after, he unilaterally decided to not honor the promised buy-back scheme. There's just no way you can possible spin Dean's actions as anything but scammy to the extreme.

I think the only question is: why? Did he develop a gambling or drug problem and blow everyone's money? Or is he just greedy and sitting on everyone's money?

 

I think you're perhaps being a bit too charitable. My sincere guess is that he's sitting on a considerable amount of bitcoin, and the im-so-broke is just a cover story to make recovery attempts sound unattractive. After all, that was his entire defence against investors considering (starting?) expensive legal action against him (along with threats that those would be the last to be "paid back").

We know he originally closed his site when he had secured enough money to basically comfortable retire. Then he only returned to the scene after seeing the ICO craze, and the opportunity to sell millions (!) of dollars of tokens to just reopen his site.

At one point even expressed interest in buying my site, I can't remember exactly but I think the number were were kicking around was ~10M dollars? And he was going to earmark funds for bankrolling it too. So I just don't see how the sudden leap from multi-millionaire with FU money, to penniless supposedly happened. I mean I wouldn't be terribly surprised if he developed a gambling problem or something, and blew everyone's money. But him trying to pretend he's penniless cause of "marketing" and "hacking" is ridiculous.

I could muster some empathy for him if he could be genuine for 30 seconds and try make amends. Until then, I think he's just an unrepentant scammer who is only here to add confusion and try clean up his name.

So the interesting thing about bitcoin is that it costs money to receive bitcoin. This is because eventually you are going to need to spend the money, and it's a lot cheaper to send a single 10 BTC output, than ten 1 BTC ones. For an un-optimized wallet (like 99% out there...) this is actually fairly expensive.

So what some casinos do is impose a min deposit, while others will ban accounts that make too many tiny deposits (e.g. from faucets). This is pretty suboptimal, because a user shouldn't really need to have to worry about what the min deposit amount is, or what is "abuse" or not.

But what is by far the best way to handle it, is what bustabit/bustadice do. There's no min deposit amount and you can never get banned from making too many small deposits. Instead what they do is each time you deposit create a tiny debt ("unpaid deposit fee") which is currently almost nothin (93 satoshis) which represents the cost for them to economically consolidate the inputs. When ever you want to withdraw, this fee is tacked onto the cost of a withdrawal.  It's pretty much the perfect system for both the site and users.

Pretty sure that's a fake seal you put at the bottom of your site  

That's pretty easy to disprove. e.g.



Ooops.





The question wasn't even mine, it was yoloer808's. You've probably spent hours on this thread alone, and can't even answer a simple question  

I probably wouldn't, unless I had reason to believe the only reason you scammed people in the first place was for some noble higher purpose (e.g. you had to use the money to pay for some multi-million dollar swiss cancer treatment for a family member, or something).

Don't get me wrong, paying everyone back would be an amazing development and I really hope you do. But it wouldn't change what you did, nor fix a huge amount of harm (e.g. after you reneged on your promised token buy-back, you made them virtually worthless and people sold them for cents on the dollar. Buying them back now wouldn't do much to help those people).

Just like if you burnt someone's house down -- it'd be great if you rebuilt it -- but even if you do, doesn't truly cover the extent of damages nor change the fact you're a terrible person for having burnt it down in the first place.

Now, that I answered -- how about you answer a pretty straight-forward and legitimate question (or at least provide us more entertainment with the lengths you go to in avoiding giving a straight answer to anything):

AFAIK I've only had one exploit against my sites and I was extremely public and open with all the details. Including an exact breakdown (including code!) and its implications. You can see how a professional handles it :

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=709185.800

and it goes without saying, that at no time was even a satoshi of players money at risk.


Now your turn

Thanks for posting the screenshots, even with careful cropping of context they confirm exactly what I said. I'm not quite sure how any reading would seem otherwise.

Anyway, feel free to export the entire history, as it'll show you repeatedly (!!!) trying to screw me.



Anyway, how come you keep avoiding my really simple challenge:

It's not productive to waste time on this, as you're just making up stuff up as you go. So I'll just state that I disagree with this, and it doesn't resemble reality. I've never been in the loaning business, or interested it in. I only said I'd do it if it was > 100% collateralized, which you kept promising to do -- but at the last minute wouldn't provide the collateral or objecting to the robust escrow system and ask me to follow through with no protections.

And it's just the same right now. I think the loan business is shit and have no interest. But if someone wants to borrow >1M dollars from me, with 30% interest rates and promising >100% collateralization ... well i'm going to be interested. (But ofc no one legitimate would come to me with terms like that, as they'd find someone who is actually in the business lol)

Anyway, nothing wrong with trying and failing. And if you're going to scam, you might as well do it properly -- so hey, no hard feelings. Just trying to paint yourself as the victim isn't a great look.



You keep acting like the truth is "out there", but you consistently refuse to answer the most basic question. Like take yoloer808's question which was asked in good faith. Why don't you prove me wrong, and provide a genuine answer:

rofl, I love how you keep going back and forth between that I know everything and know nothing.

---

The reality is pretty simple though, Dean blatantly scammed people. He blatantly ripped off his ICO investors, bankroll investors and his players. He even reached out privately to borrow money (at unbelievable good interest rates) just before scamming people, which to me indicates there was even a level of pre-mediation behind the whole thing.

So, really, the only part that is actually unclear is if he is still sitting on all the money or not. I know he was getting pretty big into day-trading and high(ish?) stake poker. So it's conceivable to me that ended up being real problem gambling, and he ended up trading/betting with money that wasn't his, and lost it.  But that's the charitable explanation for him scamming.

---

And the other truth is, if there was a reasonable explanation -- he's just post it instead of guarding it like some secret knowledge. It would in fact take 1/100th the amount of effort to just have a public explanation rather than spinning 100 different and conflicting stories.  The investors I spoke to believe strongly they were all scammed (although, I'm sure there's selection bias involved. ) but want to go through with Dean's little charade in the off-chance they get reimbursed.


But really, the only reason I'm posting here is I just don't want Dean to be able to whitewash his image and act like it was a mistake or simple business failure. In a just world, he'd face some pretty serious prison time for what he did.
 

Damn it, Dean. So which is it?




---

But man, must suck to have created such a tangled web of lies you can't even offer a reasonable explanation for anything    

Are you trying to imply the hacker didn't win more than the entire bankroll? If that's the case, why wouldn't you let users withdraw their funds?

I can confidently say on any site I've run, I never would've went live if I couldn't guarantee that it was impossible for a player (with or without the server seed) to win more than the bankroll. That would just be criminally negligent.

I don't even get the hack story. You claim someone found out the server seed? But how on earth could that lead to someone stealing take MORE than the ENTIRE bankroll?



Well your explanation seems to be "millions of dollars just vanished! (um expenses!!!) And my lawyer told me i don't need to do what i promised!". ok.





And exactly how much of that was your money, vs bitslers? Anyway, even if you reimburse thousands of dollars after scamming millions ... it doesn't materially change anything...

It's a pretty poor argument when you've repeatedly warned investors that they will suffer reprisals (such as being the last to get paid back). I've been personally contacted by people you've scammed, but they've asked me to not say their names to not jeopardize any chances at reimbursement (as calling you out for them has pretty much 0 upside).  Frankly, I'm kind of amazed that this type of intimidation works -- I would've thought everyone realizes there's literally not a chance in hell you'll returned the scammed funds ... but I guess hope is a powerful force.

Fair enough. I'm not sure where I stand on that. On one hand, I lean towards thinking a site should be able to refuse service to who ever it wants. But on the other hand, I'd feel pretty uncomfortable if that was taken to the logical extreme (e.g. refusing to serve black people).

So just to be clear:

*) You were asked to not play or use the site, and that if you ignored the ban your account and funds would be frozen for 30 days
*) You ignored the ban, and your account has been frozen for 30 days

So what's exactly the scam accusation: Do you consider it illegitimate for a casino to ban people? Or is your concern that your account won't be unfrozen after 30 days?

As a self-proclaimed scammer, I'd think you'd be a bit ... harder? Having your funds locked (so you can't try meet chat reqs to scam people) for 30 days (after an explicit warning that it would happen) seems like the ultimate slap on the wrist.

----

On a side note: one thing I really wish bustabit had was a sort of temporal leaderboard. Pretty often I see large changes to the bankroll, and it'd be nice to see where the money went (or came from). Something like the leaderboard except with "1 day" and "1 week" and "1 month" and "all time" would be really cool imo.

Indeed. I'm an idiot and wrong, I can see you did buy a copy  

On a side note, I noticed that bitsler added "blast" which is using the bustabit code (for posterity) but was unable to find a link to the modified source code (like the AGPLv3 would require) and didn't see it using a paid license (like would be specified in https://bustabit.com/license.txt ). What's the backstory there?


Edit: I'm wrong, bitsler did buy a license years ago