Before I go into any details about those security and circle and loyalty things, a quick glance on your website shows me this



Does this means anyone interested in your project will need to wait for two more years to get the full launch? And you've been preparing this, building the website and the ecosystem around it for three years? Since 2020?

Before I dive any further and go into details, one quick question: are you related --more specifically, the child company-- of Evorich? I did a preliminary DD and see that their facebook account posted an FAQ article about you.

Current number of post (Including this one): 2566
Rank: Hero
bech32 address: bc1qcmwf7ckusenz7vjsvp8pwhjqn9gyulrtejeq74
Merit earned in the last 120 days: 49

Not trying to get out of topic but... you're necromancing a dead thread anyway, so... I assume this is the new owner of the account talking?

Let's see if I get this straight, the previous "got a win" is more or less a signed agreement that OwlGames will pay certain amount of compensation to you to close this case, although all of the previous discussion and input and warning and opinion or whatever else thrown by other forum members on the previous pages urged that this case wouldn't --well, shouldn't-- just stopped by paying a sum of money and we need to see the real problem here --whether a game really being cheated, where's that 97% came from, etc--, which at that time you think is more than adequate, so you're happily signed the contract --namely to close this case-- and declared that everything is solved, you reached an agreement, told us that they have a huge cash, and so on, and so on.

The next day, you reached to your lawyer and think the sum of compensation is very small, OwlGames should paid you more, thus the problem is not solved at all?

I'm not familiar at all with gambling and their terms, so I have to rely on the internet to look for the definition of the terms wintomato accused OP did here that put him on this position, but unless the definition I read are wrong --all five of them, actually, so the odd is nearly nonexistent-- there are inconsistencies on your counter-accusations against OP.

As per your reply on this thread, quoted above, you ban OP because they violate your TnC of value betting, which you neatly also explained on the lower part of the post. While the screenshot of email on 17 September, and whatever emails that you're yet to show us to backup the "multiple times" claim, is a warning is about the arbitrage betting.

These two, according to five different sites I read, are a different thing. On arbit betting, you bet on several outcome simultaneously, while value betting is simply --which can also be summed from your own post-- is the act of placing one bet where you're kinda sure --still a gamble, though-- that the outcome would be against the odds that the bookie placed. A nice comparison is here:


So, if you ban OP, stating that the reason is because you've warned them several times about arbit betting which they kept ignoring and forced you to lock their account, it can be summarized that either (1) you're as clueless as me about betting terms because the two counter-accusation you gave are two different things and yet somehow you understand them as one similar thing which leads you to ban them and ultimately leads us all to this position, and how on earth does a professional betting provider didn't know that they're different thing? Or... (2) you ban every user the instance they tried a betting method, no first warning or whatev. Bear in mind --in case you missed my point-- that the two is a different thing, so your email on 17th September --arbit betting-- is completely unrelated to the explanation of the "cheating" the OP did as per your explanation on 25th of November --value betting. And please note that from the way I understand them, these methods are actually quite legal as they're counted as "strategies".

Of course, the two possible summary above is under the assumption that OP is indeed utilize one of the two methods, you should explain how does OP arbit betting if they loses a lot of times. Or, if they're value betting, why does the invalid ones --thus revoked-- are only the winning terms while the other bets aren't. I think, the first thing you should do right now is make up your mind whether you ban OP for value betting or arbit betting... it'll be nice if we can have a side dish of explanation about how you mixed up both terms too.

I'm glad OwlGames finally can see through aew deception and that the case is closed. The "got a win" on OP's title put a smile on my face because he sounded really happy.

To ensure that such situation didn't repeat itself again, I'd suggest to tag the real scammer here so anyone else in the future didn't fall into his trap. I've also raised a flag as a further precaution --that yellow banner kinda nice attention catcher for anyone missed the red numbers under his profile-- if anyone would like to support.

[1] As others has pointed, you're rather misleading and IMO tries to drive the narrative to sway into your way. That is not a good impression to show to public as a responsible company. OP did NOT admitting anything about faking a chat with the "security team", nor trying to blame aew --because aew IS the one to blame. OP didn't say he faked the chat, it's just made known by others by piecing the screenshots by OP that the dirt is on aew for the said evidence, and it's been offered on my previous post that the said point to be removed from this accusation. Everybody here understand the situation, not sure why you failed to see it too, or if you actually understood, then I can't see why you keep bringing this up.

[2]
Again, as pointed out several times, the case is irrelevant to OP's membership age. Although there are cases in the past --and future-- that a scammer does use a brand new alt to scam someone and protect their higher ranked and older membership from being exposed. But so far OP's reasoning is acceptable --partly because you still refuses to give your evidences--, and we gives every side here a benefit of doubts, including you. Tell me, honestly, in your opinion, let's say I browsed through Amazon for the past three years, keep looking for items I wanted to buy, reading reviews and descriptions, and then one day, I finally signed up, purchased an item, and when it's delivered to me, it's malfunctioning. I opened a complaint ticket. Would the Amazon staff said, "No, you're a scammer. Your account is three days old and on your first purchase you instantly said the product had an issue?"

[3]
Irrelevant. Can't see why him winning and losing gives even a teaspoon to the weight on the scale for this case. If any, it just show (1) he IS a big gambler --70k? come on, it's huge-- or (2) you deliberately let him play the only game that you know he would lose, a lot, so that the final due that has to be paid would be much lower. I agreed with OP, why did you only allowed him to play that specific game? Why not others? Why only that one?

[4]
These part repulse me so much. You're basically blackmailing him on your point number 2. While for point number 3, I asked you again, and this is the... well I actually lost count how many times you failed to address this simple question to you: what is the time frame? How difficult is it to pull data that the OP is cheating or legit? How long has it been? Eight days? Wow. I don't think it is that difficult for a CEO or even the head of security team to glance around their server room, look at a random head and say, "You, leave whatever you're doing and dig through this user's log. I want a full report before you clocking out today."

Tell you what, how about you tell us the name of that bgaming provider and if they have an account here, or even create an account --after verifying in some way that they're indeed the representative of bgaming and not you pretending to be him, much like the stunt aew pulled-- to address this issue and we'll add them to this equation?

[5]
Just to be clear here, no one is encouraging you to pay TO close this case. As said above, we give everyone the benefit of doubts. We are NOT asking you to "ahh fook it, just pay the OP and continue with our business before it dragged us further into the mud". We are asking you to give evidences --and professional response, where blackmailing and consitently ignoring questions from other members are definitely not professional-- on the hundreds case on this sub-board, there are more than handful where the accuser is actually someone who cheated and tried to scam, and we are here to see the end of it. So yeah, there still some chances that OP faked something and he is the scammer --I bolded that part just in case you suddenly claimed I "admit" that OP faked something. But guess what can helps us get to the bottom of this case and see who is wrong and who is right? One word, eight letters, start with an "E".

[6] Suspicious behavior, fake skype and fake telegram. Proofs? Screenshots? Anything to back up this claim? It start with an "E'....... And when you said "He sent the BGAMING chats to us in multiple ways, [...]" were you referring to the screenshot of chat with aew? Hddh? I'm ready to throw my hands in exasperation here, just cue me.

[7] How to address this situation? Well, if I may humbly suggest: one, you can start acting like how a PR of an honored company should be; professional. Two, you can also try replying questions given to you. Three, it'll be extremely much appreciated if you can give the timeframe of how long you tried to figure out and gathered evidence against the OP. And as an addition, four, you can start explaining the reason and the thinking behind why opening his account and initial deposit, but only allowed him to play one extremely super very specific game?

[8] Again, irrelevant. Do I need a specific reason and need to made it public why I buy things from Shopee, a quite small marketplace, while I can actually "toured" to Amazon or EBay or Wallmart or Alibaba? I can't see how OP's preference contributed on this matter, unless you're saying that he deliberately went to your casino to take advantage of some bug he found, which would be plausible IF you can give the evidence backing up that counter-accusation.

As a closing note, I spent one and a half hour on my tiny tiny phone screen separating your posts into sub-topics and marking this post with numbers. If you'd do me the honor of answering all of the points I asked above. Please do us a favor and just put the number accosiated with the sub-topic I asked, no need to make the page unbearably long with our quote or a long quote of a long quote of an even longer quote.

This was taken from their official ANN thread


I have to agree with owlgames representative for his first point quoted above, we already have an active accusation here where both parties are present. I'd suggest OP to stay on this thread and not doing simultaneous discussion on both thread. It'll be quite difficult for anyone who following this case to catch up with evidences, statements, and other things related to the accusation if you divide the discussion into two threads.

For instance, the case of "that conversation is fake", it could actually put some weight into the consideration for this case, and due to OP throwing discussion elsewhere, people here --the Neutrals, if I may borrow JollyGood's words-- might not getting it.

Ok, with that said, one point that I'm trying to tackle and shed some light into here is the doubt from owlgames that OP is a scammer, which would made them reluctant to expedite the case --disregarding, for now, if that action is justified or not-- because from their perspective, OP "fabricated" an evidence. Add that to the fact that OP's account here is brand new, he uses anon telegram, etc. etc. etc. that owlgames said here^[1], it just strengthen the doubt because --maybe, according to their POV-- if OP can "fabricate" a chat history, why can't he fabricate a screenshot of bet history?

While, from OP's side, he believed all of his evidences are valid and honest. He did has all of the chat history with a "security team from bgaming", thus owlgames' accusation that he made up the conversation is unacceptable and that's just their way to twist the truth.

Now, how about this: there is, in fact, no conversation with security team, but both party is still true to their words, because the true culprit behind this fake evidence is extrarakeback... oops, I mean to say aew. I think we can all agree that it's been established that he's a scammer and he has his own agenda for this case. So he approached OP, pretending that he can help, lying about the chat with security team and fed that to the OP in hope for some reward. Thus, when he was denied of the reward, he tried to change sides.


As the chat history suggest --let's pretend for a sec that the chat history between him and "security team" is true-- that owlgames cheated OP, how on earth the person who witnessed it firsthandedly suddenly changed his mind and think that now OP is the scammer. I mean, he's the one who contacted "his friend" and was the one assured that OP won fairly. And since that he had a past history of faking transaction, faking reviews, scamming people, abusing merits, and god know what else he did in the past, it is not too far fetched that aew also faked his conversation with security team.

So, I suggest to remove the chat with security team and any other evidences that's related to aew from evidences for this case.

And, ultimately, speaking of evidences, owlgames I am still waiting for your counter-evidence of OP's betting history. As how the discussion on other thread suggest that it is quite strange for OP to screenshot every bet he did, and that it is not difficult nowadays to fabricate images, the only way that I can see that you can do to invalidate OP's evidence is if you can prove an evenmore legit bet log. Honestly, how difficult is it to get into your system and pull his betting data? I am quite sure that you can do such data pulling from your database, so I have no idea why can't you provide them the second it is asked, and it's been days since it's asked and you still can't provide them.

---

^[1] as other had said, new accounts etc. etc. didn't directy means the OP is a scammer who hid his identity, furthermore, OP even offered to prove a video call, ultimately giving an absolute KYC. So your excuse that OP is scammer because of his accounts' age is very very irrelevant. Find something else to attack him, smarter this time. Oh, before I forget, L-O-L.

---

I've been wanting to address your post before, but decided against it as it's rather out of topic because I can't see how their token price related to the scam accusation. What I was trying to say that time was something that goes with the line, "It's not decining now because, truthfully, how many from the entire "investors" actually do their DD and researched about the project they're trying to invest on? But if the cases keep piling upon their closet, there won't be much room in it to hide their skeleton and eventually everybody, be it the ones who do a thorough DD or someone who just glanced ad price chart and dive in head first into the investment, would know, and price would snowballed from that point forward.

Now, to address your implied suggestion that everything would be solved by unlocking OP's account, I have to say that the solution is like slapping a band aid over a crack in a huge dam. Suppose that OP is the right one and owlgames cheated their members --though at this point I urge everybody to stay neutral because the evidences are quite poluted. Thanks again to aew and owlgames' reluctance to provide any counter-evidence--, what could be the guarantee that this case wont repeat itself in the future? Another victim whose account got locked unfairly. A ban hammer slapped unilaterally? May I remind all of us that owlgames has their other --at least this one is unearthed and successfully made public-- misbehavior with moonbet that almost tainted moonbet's reputation if they didn't act quickly. That is why, it is not a simple case of unlocking the account and unfreezing all the fund. The case shouldn't just end there. It is best to know if owlgames has a tendency to cheat their members and throwing ban hammer like candies on halloween or OP is --by a turn of event-- the scammer here.

That is why owlgames ---ohh look at that, I even bolded their name three times in a post just to catch their attention-- provide your own proofs to invalidate OP's claim, FFS. What's so difficult about it if you're the right one here and --as per your claim-- OP is lying?

Can you expedite the verification or at least give a timeframe? If he won fair and square, it's quite unfair to keep him hanging for so long with uncertainty. If I may be honest, I actually failed to see how such issue can not be cleared in matter of hours, if not minutes, and you've been at it for four days.

You're checking if he won fairly from his bet log, right? Is it quite a complicated process for the game provider to pull one user's bet log? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it just a matter of some clicks to pull such data? And from that point, once you have --and show us-- the bet log, all we need to do was crosscheck the log with the one OP provided on the opening post --although, I have to say that OP's upload was too pixelated for me to see anything worth viewing.

I would agree with examplens that more context is needed on the refund; whether it is due to paypal's policy or extrarakeback is finally fulfilling his part of the deal. And that the alt account is a completely different issue, perhaps an even different thread --or you can simpy just edit the title-- for an accusation of merit abuse, alt account --this one is actually not prohibited by the forum-- and fake credibiity.

With that said, and a fair warning that my post will borderline out of the original topic at hand, if I may add a little bit to the scale for the case of merit abuse and --as I said above-- fake credibility, I actually have took interest on his account for a while, since I stumbled upon his colorful reply on a neighboring scam accusation thread, where he gave a... rather incorrect statement that I've been itching to reply but decided against it because... well, the thread went to sleep after someone else told him that his smart ass reply is wrong.

But that's not before I looked into his merit history which instantly rang an alarm of abuse between him and aew because they gave each other a lot of merit. Which prompt me to rake --pun intended-- both of their post histories. Unfortunatelly, I can't find a strong evidence that tied them as one person at that time --it was around late October.

The closest was how aew choose a very similar name-style for his TG handler --extrarakeback himself changed tg handler several times throughout his "career"-- @eattheblock which funnily also used by a tagged account martinglecalculator. And such weak evidence linking both account is not good. Little did I know that after I stopped looking, the evidence came to myself as extrarakeback slipped.

That's for merit abuse and alt account. Now, for fake credibility, extrarakeback has a site of referral where he would share his earning from referrals back to the people who joined through his link --not sure if it's still running or not, I can never accessed his site no matter what browser I use-- guess what? Aew come to be the first who join and happen to give a good impression, which if they're indeed are the same person --and which the evidence so far strongly pointing that way-- is kinda a clever marketing... in a dirty way.




Oh, extrarakeback also threw a generous wager competition, presumably to persuade people to bet more often and gave him more revenue from the referral, and how fortunate it is that only one participant joined the event:


And let's not leave this issue behind which will probably lead people to trust him and deal with him:



So, to conclude, if extrarakeback and aew is the same person, then not only he's also martinglecalculator, he feigned a good credibility too by making his alt to had a successful trade with him and joined his rakeback program.

I'm really hoping that owl.games side can provide evidences against OP's own; that their claim is true that OP cheated and thus deserve the account suspension. Because if OP's claim is legit and Owl can't provide the counter-evidence, it would be another problem from Owl platform.

It's just less than one month ago I joined hand with other trusted members "intermediating" a platform --Moonbet.io--
 who locked their user's account, which after an internal investigation from moonbet side. it's revealed that owl kinda unilaterally banned their user.

I'm hugely concerned about this part.

By "shipment", were you talking about buying small packages like online shopping from Amazon etc. --although I doubted it, judging from the value of the money you mentioned here-- or an FCL/LCL shipment? If it's the latter, especially if the payment term is FOB --or worse, EXW--, maybe if it's possible, you'll want to start considering to arrange to send the goods back? Given how long will this refund process from Freewallet --if they'll ever-- could take, I can't imagine how huge will the bill incurred from THC, demurrage, and storage and other late fee. The possibility of detention charge as well.

Or, at the very least, wrote an MOU or arrange something with your original seller that you'll pay them after certain amount of time, an L/C perhaps? Not sure if you still can do L/C after the product is already on your port, though, but do everything you can to take that container out of the port. The fees themselves would drain you immensely if you waited for the fund from freewallet to be liquidated.

I am not sure how correct my following statement is, as I'm not really well versed on this topic, but IMO, the short answer for your question is yes. Adding token to DEX is relatively easy, you only need to provide LP and convince your holders to do organic trading to fulfill the daily trading volume. Once these requirements --listed above on the screenshot-- met, you can apply for CG and co., and once listed on CG, I think it'll be easier to apply for a CEX. Not the big player CEX, small ones first, but that's a start.

Alternatively, if you still really aim for CEX --I'm not sure if they still do this-- you can try to enter those event of community vote free listing. I recall several big exchanges held these events years back.

Nonetheless, our discussion has walked to the zone of OOT. So if you want to know further, I'd suggest you to... have your own thread. Not sure which board for this kind of topic, though.

So, a littlle added context here that I managed to gather from a quick lookup into Canaan, Inc. that might help us better understand the situation.



Apparently, they are quite an established company, had been around since 2013 with HQ in Beijing and spread their wings to the US in 2019, even decided to go IPO on November of the same year. They are even SEC compliant, which hugely explains their rule of only accepting to refund to original wallet, perhaps as a requirement for AML, as well as confirming their reason that the refund process is quite difficult due to being divided into departments --not to mention regions as well-- so Coco's claim that the decision of refund is not on their hand and they're bound by the refund rule is somewhat believable. This company --according to wikipedia-- housed more than 300 employees. Apparently, they are not a micro company or a home online shopping provider. It is quite logical that the decision of refund is handed by other people or even the higher paycheck.

Now, with these info in our hand...

---

I think the decision to only accepting refund to be sent to the original address is due to this:


original: https://prnt.sc/d8Y2Td9AYO4h


Canaan is listed and monitored by SEC, I think they have to stay AML compliant, and the address was marked as a suspicious, which understandably discourage them to fulfill the request by OP.

For Canaan Online Shop, if my assumption above is true, do you mind disclosing the result from the third party which flagged the transaction? It'll greatly help us to understand the situation if every fact is checked and verified.

While for OP, CanaanScammers,


It is important to get everything straight and every corner covered, and especially became more important because as per your latest two screenshots it is revealed that you rather keep provoking them while they tried to be nice, whilst the previous impression you create from the screenshots --at least for me-- is that they suddenly went radio silent which angered you and made you throw tantrum. It IS a huge difference.

As for the "NAZI check", you keep refusing to explain what are these about, and I am somewhat beginning to thinking that you exaggerating this verification, making them looks like a huge and troublesome verification --which even after all those trouble, the Canaan still denies your request-- in order to build an opinion that Canaan made impossible request to prevent you from completing refund process, while maybe, just maybe, these "ten NAZI check" are not more than showing screenshot of purchase, TX ID, photo and govt ID to verify that the people asking for refund right now is the same person on their KYC database, and things like that, which quite understandable to be asked by an AML compliant company, or any other company which took huge amount of money and was asked for a refund in matter of hours. Please, please prove me wrong by listing those NAZI check here.


Why not? If 6,000 USD is huge to you --and I never said it is a small money for me-- and you've done the 10 impossible task of NAZI-hercules, what's so difficult and harmful about giving a video of you plugging in your ledger to show that it is not turning on if that'll help you gain your money back? You could even hide your ID by not turning the camera to your face --duh--, and even if you did, they already know your face from KYC, so I think that made little to no difference.


When you said you ordered with a shaking hand... you mean literally and not methaporically because it was a huge tranaction? Your hands are literally shaking that you accidentally pressed order, add 4 to the amount of goods ordered, as well as accidentally clicked verify, entered amount of fund sent on your ledger UI, and other processes from the start to the end? Jesus. You sure you don't want to have those hands checked? From 1 to 10, how close is it to a parkinson? A seizure? May I suggest you to refrain from operating heavy machinery whenever you're nervous? At least until you've consulted your tremor to a specialist.

And  then your ledger broke and the company refused to refund to other address... tell me again, whose graveyard or which burial ground did you pissed on last night? You might want to return and burn some sages.


I suggested you to troubleshoot it, see if you can fix it, the proof so far shows that it'll be easier to try fixing it instead of requesting your refund to be procesed to other address. But now, exampens's suggestion could be an alternative. Giving an extra proof and doing the 11th impossible nazi-hercules task by recording your ledger to show that it is broken would probably do you a favor. You hadn't throw the ledger out of your window during your tantrum last night, had you?


Well uhh... technically, if they are AML compliant and your wallet is marked for suspicious activities --and your explanation around it certainly didn't help, if I may add-- it would be illegal to reroute your money to a different wallet. Pretty much beat the purpose of anti money laundering.

While we're at it and I am very certain you've think that I am a huge pain in the ass, I'd like to upgrade my status into an exploding hemorrhoid. A little fact checks:



So did you do the research before or after the order being placed? And were you wanting to cancel the order because of the red flags you found before-slash-after the order or was it because your hand is very shaky that you made a wrong purchase?


Edit: oops... it looks like the problem solved itself while I'm busy gathering data and typing my narrative. Glad that we meet the end of it.

Ok, so, even before I read the rest of this thread and how you respond to people on this thread, and decided that you're an ass --hey, that was an honest impression I get from how you replied to them all-- I've frowned upon several things based on your opening post only, and get more and more curios as I progressed through the rest of the thread. A small tip before we begin and/or you continue with other member --me, especially-- leave your swearing and slurs elsewhere, my swear jar is currently full, I don't need your pennies overflowing it.

The first thing I stumbled upon and made this forehead creased is hpw you said that Coco ignored you both on the screenshot I cropped below as well as your other screenshot timestamped 09.04-09.08. But here in between 8.56 on your previous screenshot and on the next one --09.04-- we can see the top of Coco's chat buble, which indicate they responded to you. Do you mind showing us what their reply is? I really hope it was a simple case of you tryin to point out important chats instead of selectively screenshotting chats that works in your favor.



Second, I have to ask, really-really have to ask because I'm really curious and you can't seem to stress it enough: what are those 10 NAZI checks about? Was it the "simple" things a la KYC like your full name, DOB, govt ID., etc, or was it really-really hardcore NAZI stuff --that worth mentioning on each of your post-- like.... they asked you to verify yourself by a picture of you holding a paper signed with date and full name on your right hand while you standing with your left, a pumpkin on your bum, placed exactly at 90°, while your left and right hanging-in-the-air leg bent in a perfect shape of hakenkreuz, all the while three NAZI hippies performing blood ritual, naked and chanting in a morse code on the background? Wow, that's really serious.

Third, in regards to Coco, sadly I have to side with them at this point. In spite that it IS their job to help you, I don't think anyone would appreciate being yelled scammers on so many bubbles, alongside with passive-aggresive "do you understand me now?" --which somewhat borderline racist--, especially because I have allocated hours trying to help you and the real solution is out of my hand because I am bound by the company refund policy. So, if I was in Coco's position, you'll be lucky I was just ignoring your chat. Unless... of course, it'll probably be a different story if the chat buble from Coco that you decide to crop turns to show otherwise. I might as well muted you from the group chat because you go ballistic there too, so yeah, maybe that's not 100% their fault.

Bottomline: you dig your hole by throwing tantrum. I understand that losing 0.3btc is not a pleasant cup of coffee, and I'm really sympathetic for that, I understand that you're frustrated and scared and certainly the lack of sleep did't help, but you make matter worse for yourself by going aggresive on anyone poking their head into your snowball of mess --spoken while holding my swear jar at arm length because I don't want your horde of swears and NAZI attack filled my jar.

You can't blame Canaan or anyone else to be extremely suspicious. I mean, go ask yourself, how likely is it for someone to have their ledger broken right after they made a huge transaction and asked for a refund to different wallet, and the person who goes very-very careful that they choose hardware wallet against cheap online ones somewhat forgot to backup the seeds? If I have to be honest, their reaction to raise a defense mechanism is very nice.

Oh, --fourth-- speaking of ledger...


Uhh... maybe try to fix it? Or at least troubleshoot it? https://support.ledger.com/hc/en-us/articles/4405497678481-Follow-device-repair-instructions. Try to submerge it in a nice cup of coffee, it seems both you and your ledger needed one --ok, the last sentence is not really necessary, LOL.


Fifth, and this is the last of my rambling, let me get this straight. According to your narrative so far posted here and there on this thread, you've do a research about Canaan before you decide to proceed buying from them, found so many red flags, but still decide to finalize the purchase, got cold feet, and then asked for a refund? Am I correct? Why? You have all of the red flags, and you still decide to continue, isn't that... well, theres no point on rubbing it further on you. But was it your fault? Hmm... *raised my shoulders*

Now, I've never heard of Canaan before, but I am somewhat sure if a customer from any marketplace platform or whatever online store there is, requested to cancel because they finally decide to go against their initial decision, especially if that request is several hours after the deal is finalized and the fund as well as the order is already processed, the patform or seller has every right to deny the request. Them agreeing on refunding you is already a good start.

Finally, Canaan Online Shop, is there anything you can do about it? Granted, you're suspicious of the request of refund because the address is not the same, refund policy, and all other things said above, but given the buyer has passed all of the verification you asked, can you do an exception this time and allow the refund to go to the designated wallet? This account of his is disposable, but you have all of his details already, I think banning him from any further transaction with you by using that info for any further purchases is a punishment enough --not that I think he'll ever want to buy anything from you anymore, anyway.

If you still want conduct a further DD on his details, maybe put the fund into an escrow to hold until you're satisfied with your DD. Meanwhile, he can get less stress and more compliant because he is now sure his fund is safe and secure somewhere else.

Yes, they are free, like examplens said. The hard part that made such... fishy platform like... tokpie were preferred to help new coins to get listed is because of the conditions that has to be met to be listed, these requirements will not be disclosed to you prior to listing, but several of them are: the daily trading volume, trading spreads, and team details... which, tokpie surprisingly --in a bad way-- is more than happy to help you tailor them. You can see them yourself on the point number one of this remnant of evidence from previous expose of their shady business

Oops... it seems my planned short break got way too long (again), LOL.

There is a scam accusation format that works to help viewers of this thread understand the situation --and evidences-- easier. I'll suggest you to read the thread here or, just see the format below:


As for flags, I'm not sure if there's an easier and more "official" way, but the simplest I know is to visit their trust page, you'll get the link to raise a flag on the user's account next to the option to give negative trust, see below image. The link for their flag would be this one



My suggestion would be just like others had said, to wait one or two days to give time to respond.  As others has notified them through PM, I'll try to take one step further by going to chat both the CEO and their group on telegram. Meanwhile, I'd suggest you to edit your opening post to match the accusation format guidelines so they'll understand the situation easier when --or if-- they visit this thread.

---

They were, about an hour ago, not sure if they're still addressing other problems and other threads --and PMs-- or ignoring this thread, hopefully the earlier. As a precaution, I'll track and notify them through telegram as well, there is a slightly higher chance they'll be aware of this thread's existence through it. And if they blocked me... well, it's also an answer to our situation.

---

Update 1:

Here's their response:



Now, if I may freely intepret the situation here based on OP's chat with the CEO and his answer here and his answer to my chat on their channel, the one blocking your account is owl.games, the... provider of the... game? Huh? I am not familiar with betting platform here so I might be wrong, but let me ask this first, is it normal for a business entity to be a third party that's merely hosting an "interface" for a gambling service while the entire service and operations is handled by another business entity? If the answer is yes, then there's your answer: their silence is because they still tried to get in touch with the... service provider.

---

update 2: my apologies that this post turned into a very long and messy post with lots of screenshot and edits

A reply from their CEO. lesliegray, go check your telegram.

I think I have to agree that at this point it became a bit... useless to continue explaining the situation, but not because we will continue to point out how shady this project is --because, well, it is--, it's because you kept turning around, spinning words after words that I think you tripped yourself all around your own statements.

Let's put this straight --and hopefully bury it all--, correct me if I'm wrong, but so far, the narrative provided by you goes like this:

You built the BlokBro project back in 27 January 2022 according to the oldest record archived by wayackmachine. To build this project, according to this statement and further clarified with this one and this one, which I shall translate with google so everybody can comprehend the situation without much confusion, said as below:




Which, even further clarified that you work on them by yourself by the screenshot provided by you, contacting Lockness demanding them to provide a copyright deposit for their HTML and whitepaper and whatever documents they published that's used against you in the plagiarism accusation because according to your in-site lawyer when you consulted to them about this situation, they suggest to file a defamatory case against the accusation


Which is quite strange for a well certified lawyer working for a company to suggest as such, to file a defamatory case against a copyright violation because according to him, it is not violation because the original author never registered their work, quite strange that they didn't know how an author's right works, or what a prima facie of defamation requires to lock a case. Only after a huge effort to explain the situation to you that any author and any work of art --that includes web coding and publishing a paper-- automatically protected by law, worldwide, the "I rely on what he told me" became this,


Suddenly, all of those "as mentioned above and I rely on what he told me" --namely, the point of arguments made at least up to the statement was written: to file for defamation and get the authorities involved-- became "my lawyer did not tell me to continue" and you got down to the case, the whole regulatory article, three months period, authorities invoked, and such, by yourself.

check point number 1: the lawyer is now became Francesco Reboldi himself looking for a way to understand how to exercise his work, poorly if I may add, because I and Stalker22 could point out and educate ourselves about the automatic copyright protection with ease.

Rolling back a little bit, there is this fact of very supportive feedback that said you did a good work, one Italian, one Japanese-slash-Italian, and one your alt itself, which later found out to be... "people who work with you" and sympathize with your situation. It might be a fake feedback, or not, the jury is still... undecided about that --hint: sarcasm.

Now, moving further to the case. With the defamatory threat defused and the copyright-slash-plagiarism-slash-not-plagiarizing situation cleared, it is found that your site exercised fake team member. A further investigation I did told me that it's changed several times according to the 19 archives by waybackmachine, from seven to two, back to four, before ultimately goes into one and only Francesco Reboldi, not to mention the fake reviewers. When this facts unearthed, a statement followed:


Check point number 2: so does all the incident of accidentally copy pasted codes, things sitting atop of another, etc. happens because you're too busy working alone, not to mention having to contact LockNess by yourself to demand for the depository, or did you hire a third person who made a mess?

The lengthy narrative aside, one immense question appeared following the fact provided above: how could you failed to realize that "the third person" you hired were using fake profiles and reviews for your site? Seven months, I repeat, seven months, January to August since the site went live with the said fake details up to this day, at least seven months went with either (1) you didn't check your own website for at least 7 months --and we're not talking about small details like typo here, it's glaring, it's literally sitting in the middle of the pages, and changed quite often-- or (2) you know, you just let it happen because well... I'd like to say the word, but it'll trigger us back to the square one and I'll have to write another narrative that took me hours to write. And whichever your answer is --unless you can procure a third, unexpected and very surprising, reason for those seven months-- another question should be asked: why should anyone trust a project who had a motivation as stated on the answer for the previous question?

Wow, ok, I'll definitely tag this guy. I didn't know we have an archived page of his, so I didn't know that the original content was altered. Anyway, I can answer that question about what happened to the team. He removed them because they're... "plagiarized".

Here's our Mr. Adams Howard, who apparently is better known as Ashish Pradhan the president of Siegwerk India, as published by The Economic Times



And our Ms. Grace Wood, I don't know who her real name is, but apparently she's a model, her image can be found on many sites, like this one for example.



I didn't put much effort to dig for Mr. Kajana as it is rather pointless, we've enough proof that the team is fake.

Now, moving to their reviewers,

https://arizonaexplore.com/category/grand-canyon-grid/





https://www.teatro.it/spettacoli/pontedera/era/2018-2019/poco-piu-che-persone-il-figlio

BlokBro, anything you want to add?