DADICE : exposing investors to more risk than their kelly, misleading informatio

[dadice_dev]

We didn't attack leen in anyway

No?

What's this?

most us know how much of a manipulative and crooked fellow you are

after creating a class A whore-show there

[etc.]

Dooglus, this is not what attack means, Leen is indeed and without any doubt manipulative and crooked, and created a whore show starring you right here in this very thread (yes welcome to the show!). And these are facts.

[1714898096]

1714898096

[Quickseller]

Well after reading entire thread, its very clear to me that leen is only trying to recover her losses but this is gambling when you go as much as 10x kelly, that is a huge risk to take for some profit. You shouldn't have invested in first place if you cannot afford to lose.

leen signed up for 10x Kelly but was unknowingly given 29x Kelly. That's unacceptable.

And regarding QS, bodgy, etc... why these guys are everywhere where they get chance to abuse Da Dice. Especially this bodgy person seriously intrigues me.

It looks to me like they are everywhere that scams are happening. I see QS tackling all kinds of scammers, not only DaDice. And if you read bodgy's words you will see that he makes a lot of sense.

Most recently he's pointing out that DaDice openly admitted that they are offering bets that they can't afford to pay out, and that if anyone is "lucky" enough to win a lot they will maybe have to declare bankruptcy. Why don't they mention that in the signature spam they pay people to display? "DaDice : we probably can't afford to pay you if you win!"

Nice you mention QS, he is a well known scammer, nice you associate yourself with such people.

LOL what? Do you know how many times people have claimed I am a scammer? A lot. Do you know what all these accusations have in common? They were all made by scammers. Do you know the basis for all these claims were? None.

[dooglus]

The phrase never means in any way that we will NOT pay people. We have paid leen, we will continue to pay everyone! If some one wins 100x 20 BTC, we will either have to arrange more or declare bankruptcy in given circumstances? Could there be a more reasonable answer to this?

YES! The more reasonable answer would be "of course we can pay out winners, because we don't risk what we can't afford to lose. Anything else would be immoral".

Your answer appears to be, when paraphrased, "we will continue to risk 20 BTC per roll even when the bankroll has already been won, and if it goes negative we will try to find more coins or declare bankruptcy". When rewritten like that isn't it clear how wrong-headed your stance is?

Well that was all not an issue before, when she (he) invested under the same conditions but was in profit. Dooglus as said before, we haven't changed our conditions since the start. And leen was aware of those conditions. That is the point, so we don't have to write long stories here.

leen isn't on trial here, and has merely pointed out that how your site works is wrong. That you haven't changed your conditions since the start despite us trying to help you fix them is precisely the problem. Your conditions are broken.

Secondly, she attacked us publicly in the first place, since this time it doesn't go her way. Can't you see that, what kind of liar this person is. Want more evidence that she is even lying about her sex. I can post it here! Wondering if you would call this "paraphrased" as well

I don't care about her sex. Or whether she's manipulative. Or a "class A whore". Or any of the other ad hominem attacks you keep throwing out there. How is the gender she identifies as in any way relevant to the discussion in hand? She pointed out how your site took 29% of her investment from a single roll when her account was set to a 10x Kelly setting and so should only ever risk 10% of her investment per roll. And rather than apologising, refunding her, and fixing the problem you instead chose to attack her personally.

I would never do that, but that's because I don't smell like reindeer poop. Like you do.

I'm not very good at ad hominem attacks. How did I do? Did it work?

If you were using "Kelly system", you wouldn't even have a "max. payout". You would have a "max. profit". And it would be way lower than 20 BTC.

Well, you knew this all before. Why haven't you pointed it our before -- when you mentioned our 20 btc max payouts ? Taking opportunities here?

I didn't know all this before. This is the first I have heard about your fake "Kelly" system. You have hidden the investment feature on your site as a way of pretending that it doesn't matter that you are unable to prove solvency, and so there is no way I could have learned about your broken "Kelly" system.

If you had been transparent about how your investment system works, instead of hiding it away to avoid the pressure to show solvency, I would have been able to point this obvious flaw out sooner.

Well, then read our manual, that was accepted by leen. I repeat it again:

Here is more information from our removed investors manual:

Kelly 1 is like a straight investment. Let us assume that there is no bankroll and you invest 10 btc. This will make your investment 100% of the bankroll, and you will get 100% of the house edge, in case the player loses. If a player wins, the amount they win will be deducted in full.

Kelly 0.5 halves your risk thus you invest 10btc but the total bankroll (if there are no other investors) is now only 5 BTC. Accordingly you profits and losses are less.

Kelly 2 you would invest 10 BTC. Thus you would create a bankroll of 20 btc in total, but since you have invested only 10 BTC, your risk level has since doubled, but then again so have your profits, if players are losing.

Therefor the higher the Kelly level is, the more risk you are taking.

Where was I meant to find this manual? You were busy pretending that you no longer offered investments.

The part of the manual that you have quoted is badly written and makes no mention of there being a static maximum payout in operation. As far as it goes, what you have described makes perfect sense. What you miss out is something like "oh, by the way, we don't actually use the Kelly criterion to decide how much to risk per bet - we allow a payout of 20 BTC per bet no matter how much is in the bankroll".

Nice you mention QS, he is a well known scammer, nice you associate yourself with such people.

You're attacking the people instead of the arguments again. If someone makes a well reasoned logical argument, does it matter whether they are a class A whore or not?

Most recently he's pointing out that DaDice openly admitted that they are offering bets that they can't afford to pay out, and that if anyone is "lucky" enough to win a lot they will maybe have to declare bankruptcy. Why don't they mention that in the signature spam they pay people to display? "DaDice : we probably can't afford to pay you if you win!"

We paid so far each and every request we have received, proof us otherwise.

"so far" being the important part here.

Lots of obvious Ponzi scams have honoured every withdrawal request "so far" too. It proves nothing.

If you're going to keep allowing a maximum payout of 20 BTC no matter how much you lose, you risk being unable to pay winners.

will dooglus leave negative trust to leen93 for lying to him? as he used false information fed by leen to ask if "we will not pay" statement is official policy of Da Dice.  

I don't see where leen lied to me. Paraphrased maybe, but not lied. Is that the 'lie' you're referring to?

One said:
  "we will pay as much as we can"
The other claimed they said:
  "we will not pay him the won amount"

Do you not see they are the same? If "as much as you can" is less than you have available then that is the same as not paying the won amount. Declaring bankruptcy in the face of a win you can't pay out is the same as not paying the won amount.

So no, I don't think that in any way deserves negative feedback.

Are you suffering Alzheimer mate??? Read here entire posts and you will know what we are talking about. Seems you like to overread the important parts.
.

"we"? I think you forgot to switch to the sockpuppet account here. Mate.

I asked which "lie" you were referring to. And instead of answering, you make an "Alzheimer" joke? You are bad at your job. Like really bad.

[dadice_dev]

We know the implementation of our investment program and fact that Max. payout is 20 BTC on site, and it has always been like there. This is a not a bug, this is how we want it to work.

It is very clear that you don't read all of the posts and only jump to what you think are important parts. If you did read the entire thread, you would know that leens bet was indeed 9 BTC profit (but in fact profit was way more, due to consecutive wins, but that is NOT the point), the point with that specific roll is MAX. PAYOUT OF 20 BET, and leen being totally aware of it.

Let us not forget that this thread is a "SCAM Accusation" thread, and the fact that OP has no credebility in his/her claims. OP just like all other investors was very well aware of max. payout being 20 BTC.  Also: Given the hypothetical situation, that you are trying to make a big deal out of, Player only wins as far as the bankroll exists and is positive. This is a major fuck up in your calculations, if there is no bankroll, there will be nothing to reward player out of. And thus my answer comes back into scene: We will pay as much as we can.

You definitely have some personal interest with Da Dice but rest assured we don't need your advice when it comes to marketing and commercial policies. I will prefer if you stick to the topic. This entire accusation is based on lie from a whining gambler trying to recover losses. If you are blind enough to see it, let me make it clear for you, Da Dice is a long term investment, we are financing marketing, signature campaigns, and other events, we even hired 3rd party marketing team for this purpose. We want to offer 20 BTC max. payout to our players (note this!), and there are many other things that we do and want to do, none of them should of your concern!

...And we don't need public investments! after the criticism we made it private and we are doing just fine without your advices on how should we run Da Dice.

[XinXan]

Well after reading entire thread, its very clear to me that leen is only trying to recover her losses but this is gambling when you go as much as 10x kelly, that is a huge risk to take for some profit. You shouldn't have invested in first place if you cannot afford to lose.

leen signed up for 10x Kelly but was unknowingly given 29x Kelly. That's unacceptable.

And regarding QS, bodgy, etc... why these guys are everywhere where they get chance to abuse Da Dice. Especially this bodgy person seriously intrigues me.

It looks to me like they are everywhere that scams are happening. I see QS tackling all kinds of scammers, not only DaDice. And if you read bodgy's words you will see that he makes a lot of sense.

Most recently he's pointing out that DaDice openly admitted that they are offering bets that they can't afford to pay out, and that if anyone is "lucky" enough to win a lot they will maybe have to declare bankruptcy. Why don't they mention that in the signature spam they pay people to display? "DaDice : we probably can't afford to pay you if you win!"

Nice you mention QS, he is a well known scammer, nice you associate yourself with such people.

LOL what? Do you know how many times people have claimed I am a scammer? A lot. Do you know what all these accusations have in common? They were all made by scammers. Do you know the basis for all these claims were? None.

Well honestly asides from any proofs of them being scammers or not this behavior it's pretty fishy, calling everyone who called them scammers and generally pretty rude to everyone definitely does not make them look better in any way

[dadice]

Well after reading entire thread, its very clear to me that leen is only trying to recover her losses but this is gambling when you go as much as 10x kelly, that is a huge risk to take for some profit. You shouldn't have invested in first place if you cannot afford to lose.

leen signed up for 10x Kelly but was unknowingly given 29x Kelly. That's unacceptable.

And regarding QS, bodgy, etc... why these guys are everywhere where they get chance to abuse Da Dice. Especially this bodgy person seriously intrigues me.

It looks to me like they are everywhere that scams are happening. I see QS tackling all kinds of scammers, not only DaDice. And if you read bodgy's words you will see that he makes a lot of sense.

Most recently he's pointing out that DaDice openly admitted that they are offering bets that they can't afford to pay out, and that if anyone is "lucky" enough to win a lot they will maybe have to declare bankruptcy. Why don't they mention that in the signature spam they pay people to display? "DaDice : we probably can't afford to pay you if you win!"

Nice you mention QS, he is a well known scammer, nice you associate yourself with such people.

LOL what? Do you know how many times people have claimed I am a scammer? A lot. Do you know what all these accusations have in common? They were all made by scammers. Do you know the basis for all these claims were? None.

Shall I feel pitty for you, silly muppet?

You didn't complain when you made 1 btc with our signature campaign, didn't you? One more BTCtalk hypocrites here...

[dadice]

Well after reading entire thread, its very clear to me that leen is only trying to recover her losses but this is gambling when you go as much as 10x kelly, that is a huge risk to take for some profit. You shouldn't have invested in first place if you cannot afford to lose.

leen signed up for 10x Kelly but was unknowingly given 29x Kelly. That's unacceptable.

And regarding QS, bodgy, etc... why these guys are everywhere where they get chance to abuse Da Dice. Especially this bodgy person seriously intrigues me.

It looks to me like they are everywhere that scams are happening. I see QS tackling all kinds of scammers, not only DaDice. And if you read bodgy's words you will see that he makes a lot of sense.

Most recently he's pointing out that DaDice openly admitted that they are offering bets that they can't afford to pay out, and that if anyone is "lucky" enough to win a lot they will maybe have to declare bankruptcy. Why don't they mention that in the signature spam they pay people to display? "DaDice : we probably can't afford to pay you if you win!"

Nice you mention QS, he is a well known scammer, nice you associate yourself with such people.

LOL what? Do you know how many times people have claimed I am a scammer? A lot. Do you know what all these accusations have in common? They were all made by scammers. Do you know the basis for all these claims were? None.

Well honestly asides from any proofs of them being scammers or not this behavior it's pretty fishy, calling everyone who called them scammers and generally pretty rude to everyone definitely does not make them look better in any way

Well scammer is a pretty big word, isn't it. Without any proof, with honoring each and every withdrawal request, with having build one of the most advanced dice sites yet, already number 3 after rolls or so within a bit over 4 months. But that might be their real problem.

EGO

So if somebody is calling us names - by all means, shouldn't we have the right to call them names back, don't you think so?

[Quickseller]

Well after reading entire thread, its very clear to me that leen is only trying to recover her losses but this is gambling when you go as much as 10x kelly, that is a huge risk to take for some profit. You shouldn't have invested in first place if you cannot afford to lose.

leen signed up for 10x Kelly but was unknowingly given 29x Kelly. That's unacceptable.

And regarding QS, bodgy, etc... why these guys are everywhere where they get chance to abuse Da Dice. Especially this bodgy person seriously intrigues me.

It looks to me like they are everywhere that scams are happening. I see QS tackling all kinds of scammers, not only DaDice. And if you read bodgy's words you will see that he makes a lot of sense.

Most recently he's pointing out that DaDice openly admitted that they are offering bets that they can't afford to pay out, and that if anyone is "lucky" enough to win a lot they will maybe have to declare bankruptcy. Why don't they mention that in the signature spam they pay people to display? "DaDice : we probably can't afford to pay you if you win!"

Nice you mention QS, he is a well known scammer, nice you associate yourself with such people.

LOL what? Do you know how many times people have claimed I am a scammer? A lot. Do you know what all these accusations have in common? They were all made by scammers. Do you know the basis for all these claims were? None.

Shall I feel pitty for you, silly muppet?

You didn't complain when you made 1 btc with our signature campaign, didn't you? One more BTCtalk hypocrites here...

I was just pointing out that everyone who has claimed I am a scammer is a scammer themselves and that there is no basis for calling me a scammer. No one reputable has ever believed that I am a scammer.

So what I advertised for you? I provided a service and received payment for that service. If I had known you were a scam site then I would not have advertised your site.

[dadice]

Well after reading entire thread, its very clear to me that leen is only trying to recover her losses but this is gambling when you go as much as 10x kelly, that is a huge risk to take for some profit. You shouldn't have invested in first place if you cannot afford to lose.

leen signed up for 10x Kelly but was unknowingly given 29x Kelly. That's unacceptable.

And regarding QS, bodgy, etc... why these guys are everywhere where they get chance to abuse Da Dice. Especially this bodgy person seriously intrigues me.

It looks to me like they are everywhere that scams are happening. I see QS tackling all kinds of scammers, not only DaDice. And if you read bodgy's words you will see that he makes a lot of sense.

Most recently he's pointing out that DaDice openly admitted that they are offering bets that they can't afford to pay out, and that if anyone is "lucky" enough to win a lot they will maybe have to declare bankruptcy. Why don't they mention that in the signature spam they pay people to display? "DaDice : we probably can't afford to pay you if you win!"

Nice you mention QS, he is a well known scammer, nice you associate yourself with such people.

LOL what? Do you know how many times people have claimed I am a scammer? A lot. Do you know what all these accusations have in common? They were all made by scammers. Do you know the basis for all these claims were? None.

Shall I feel pitty for you, silly muppet?

You didn't complain when you made 1 btc with our signature campaign, didn't you? One more BTCtalk hypocrites here...

I was just pointing out that everyone who has claimed I am a scammer is a scammer themselves and that there is no basis for calling me a scammer. No one reputable has ever believed that I am a scammer.

So what I advertised for you? I provided a service and received payment for that service. If I had known you were a scam site then I would not have advertised your site.

You will see in 6 or 12 month, when we have crashed the competition who is a scam site

[asuspc]

I don't understand the reason why everybody is going off topic here. Leen93 made an accusation, an accusation! Since their investment program is private, and leen being one of those private investors, only question to ask is whether or not leen93 was aware of maximum payout being 20 BTC at dadice. And given evidence clearly suggests that he was not only aware of this but also had made a roll for himself with payout over 18 BTC. And that was couple months old! No need to mention how leen associated a lie with Da Dice while making we will not pay statement in "double quote" to make it look geniune.  

So in relevance to this thread, I think leen is clearly responsible for his own losses.

There must be some forums rule about throwing baseless scam accusations. Why do I find QS, bodgy, and couple other guys always going off topic in any Da Dice related thread? Please tell me more about this! why? just don't go saying that you "think" this is a scam.

[XinXan]

As i said their behavior it's pretty bad and it does not help them in any way, yes there might not be a definitive proof of them being scammers but i seriously don't see how acting like that makes your site look any better, you had the chance of clearing your name by showing proof of funds and you didnt want to although you said yourself that one of your priorities is to be trusted and honest.

[dadice]

As i said their behavior it's pretty bad and it does not help them in any way, yes there might not be a definitive proof of them being scammers but i seriously don't see how acting like that makes your site look any better, you had the chance of clearing your name by showing proof of funds and you didnt want to although you said yourself that one of your priorities is to be trusted and honest.

The only bad behavior is from the OP. We just defended ourselves. On the other side, I have decided to halt any campaigns here until further notice, as from tomorrow, since we receive 80% of our business from sites other then btctalk. So we can nicely survive without this permanent bullshit here.

[dooglus]

It is very clear that you don't read all of the posts and only jump to what you think are important parts.

I did read all the posts. I didn't reply to them all, but I did reply to too many of them already.

If you did read the entire thread, you would know that leens bet was indeed 9 BTC profit

I do know that. You can tell that I know it because I said it here:

That shows someone betting 9 BTC at 2x and profiting by 9 BTC

(but in fact profit was way more, due to consecutive wins, but that is NOT the point), the point with that specific roll is MAX. PAYOUT OF 20 BET, and leen being totally aware of it.

This is true, but unimportant. When applying the Kelly criterion, it's the profit that matters, not the payout. That is how Just-Dice was able to offer payouts of 7000 BTC to "mechs" even though the site's bankroll was only 50k BTC. That's over 10% of the bankroll. The reason is that his profit was only around 250 BTC per bet - or 0.5% of the bankroll.

Let us not forget that this thread is a "SCAM Accusation" thread, and the fact that OP has no credebility in his/her claims

OP's credibility doesn't matter when what they say is undisputed. You and she both agree that you are allowing players to profit by more than they should according to the Kelly multipliers the investors have set. You just don't seem to understand why that is a problem yet.

Also: Given the hypothetical situation, that you are trying to make a big deal out of, Player only wins as far as the bankroll exists and is positive. This is a major fuck up in your calculations, if there is no bankroll, there will be nothing to reward player out of. And thus my answer comes back into scene: We will pay as much as we can.

It's hard to follow you sometimes, but I'm trying. The hypothetical situation is "a player wins a lot". Not just one max bet, but a lot of them. It can happen. What does "Player only wins as far as the bankroll exists and is positive" mean? Does the maximum payout depend on the bankroll somehow? I thought you said it doesn't. Do the rolls? I know some sites rig the rolls such that players can't win when the bankroll is too low, but I don't think that's what you're saying here. So what do you intend that bolded quote mean? Maybe that you will shut the site down when the bankroll is less than 20 BTC? But if that was the case why would you be including declaring bankruptcy in your plans? I've tried hard to understand what you're trying to say, but don't get it. And if you could point out my "major fuck up" that would be nice too. I am saying that your fixed maximum payout risks being unable to pay big winners. Am I wrong there?

You definitely have some personal interest with Da Dice but rest assured we don't need your advice when it comes to marketing and commercial policies.

I have no interest in DaDice. I react the same way to any dubious behaviour I see from any site. Don't take it personally. Check my post history and you'll see I'm always nagging at one scammy operation or another. Most recently some "crypto-games.net" site was accidentally offering +EV bets to their players and wouldn't believe it when told about it for example. And scrypt.cc continues to pretend to be mining with 850 GH/s of scrypt hashing power.

I will prefer if you stick to the topic. This entire accusation is based on lie from a whining gambler trying to recover losses.

What's the lie? I've asked, you responded with an attack on me. Maybe you're the one who needs to focus here.

If you are blind enough to see it, let me make it clear for you, Da Dice is a long term investment, we are financing marketing, signature campaigns, and other events, we even hired 3rd party marketing team for this purpose. We want to offer 20 BTC max. payout to our players (note this!), and there are many other things that we do and want to do, none of them should of your concern!

...And we don't need public investments! after the criticism we made it private and we are doing just fine without your advices on how should we run Da Dice.

But you're not, are you. You are offering bets you aren't bankrolled to offer, with the plan of not paying out if anyone wins too many of them.

That isn't just fine. It isn't even acceptable.

Shall I feel pitty for you, silly muppet?

Again with the ad hominem attacks?

The only bad behavior is from the OP. We just defended ourselves.

Not true. You have behaved very rudely and unprofessionally. Most of the personal attacks made in this thread were by you or your 'supporters'. See "silly muppet" one quote up from here...

On the other side, I have decided to halt any campaigns here until further notice, as from tomorrow, since we receive 80% of our business from sites other then btctalk.

At least something good came out of this then. Thank you.

[dadice]

At least something good came out of this then. Thank you.

Well, we'll meet again mate -- and than you can decide again if that was good

[dadice_dev]

This is true, but unimportant. When applying the Kelly criterion, it's the profit that matters, not the payout. That is how Just-Dice was able to offer payouts of 7000 BTC to "mechs" even though the site's bankroll was only 50k BTC. That's over 10% of the bankroll. The reason is that his profit was only around 250 BTC per bet - or 0.5% of the bankroll.

That is the only meaningful and relevant part of your entire post. Since we are denying this scam accusation, we came with proofs of leen not acting in good faith and now you being accomplice for her lies. We have proved that leen was aware of max. payout for a long time and this entire SCAM accusation is based on her lying and not acting in good faith.

You have already given us negative trust, let it be, we do NOT need your or anyones advices on how much max. payout we should have nor how much we spending on marketing. Beat it!

Edit:

Only thing undisputed so far is our ability to pay. And this is again none of your concern and this is not relevant to SCAM accusation. Max. Payout is and has always been 20 BTC, it is the decision we understand and took for betterment of Da Dice. If we ever need commercial/marketing related advice, you are the last person I will consult with.

As said before we are not interested to discuss your "shoulds" and "coulds" and "woulds", They are totally irrelevant to this thread and totally irrelevant to us. (Just like it was expressed months ago)

Edit:

The case with crypto-games and Scrypt is totally different. There was a bug in their system, there is no bug with our investments but we do offer 20 BTC max. payout which our investors are aware of, Now you are only curious about our ability to pay big winner. Well we have NOT disappointed any big winner so far, and we will not disappoint them in future.

[glorg44]

Well this thread is full of cunts   OP being a total cunt lying about things just trying to recover losses, QuickSeller, bodgy and more of this "dirty dozen"  being total cunts and throwing scam accusations here and there and finally a legendary "cunt" who has no idea that he is talking in a scam accusation thread where defendants reserve right to defend their name.  

[dooglus]

That is the only meaningful and relevant part of your entire post.

I don't think you are qualified to judge that.

Since we are denying this scam accusation, we came with proofs of leen not acting in good faith and now you being accomplice for her lies.

I will ask again. What lies are you referring to?

We have proved that leen was aware of max. payout for a long time and this entire SCAM accusation is based on her lying and not acting in good faith.

The forum allows you to quote other people's posts. Maybe use it to make it clear where she or I are lying. Thanks.

You have already given us negative trust, let it be, we do NOT need your or anyones advices on how much max. payout we should have nor how much we spending on marketing. Beat it!

The purpose of a scam allegation thread isn't to give you advice, but to warn others of your deception. So accept my help or don't, it doesn't matter. All that matters is that people are allowed to speak the truth so that there is less chance of other people falling victim to your deception. You don't get to tell me to "beat it" out of someone else's thread.

Only thing undisputed so far is our ability to pay.

No, that is also disputed. You are unable or unwilling to prove solvency, and have said that your maximum payout per bet is a flat 20 BTC regardless of the size of your bankroll. It's not clear that you even have enough funds to pay all your investors right now if they wanted to withdraw, let alone that you would be able to pay any big winners. So yeah - not at all undisputed.

And this is again none of your concern and this is not relevant to SCAM accusation. Max. Payout is and has always been 20 BTC, it is the decision we understand and took for betterment of Da Dice. If we ever need commercial/marketing related advice, you are the last person I will consult with.

Your operation concerns me. As in it is concerning. I worry that you are going to end up ripping off a whole bunch of people. You can argue that this isn't any of my business, but I would disagree. When I see a site acting irresponsibly and endangering the funds entrusted to them, I want to speak up. You aren't "consulting" with me. You're making very weak arguments and person attacks in a futile attempt to defend yourself against valid accusations.

As said before we are not interested to discuss your "shoulds" and "coulds" and "woulds", They are totally irrelevant to this thread and totally irrelevant to us. (Just like it was expressed months ago)

It's a shame that you feel this way.  When you ignore what you should do, and are blind to what could go wrong you are taking unacceptable risks with other people's money.

The case with crypto-games and Scrypt is totally different.

No shit. You claimed "You definitely have some personal interest with Da Dice" because I was arguing with you. I posted examples of other dubious sites to show that it is nothing personal against you, but that I engage other misbehaving sites in the same way. Did you really not understand that?

Now you are only curious about our ability to pay big winner. Well we have NOT disappointed any big winner so far, and we will not disappoint them in future.

There is nothing to be curious about. You yourself have admitted that you aren't able to pay anyone who wins too much. You even tried to claim that all sites are the same. So don't try now to pretend that you are able to pay someone who wins 20 BTC 100 times.

Well this thread is full of cunts   OP being a total cunt lying about things just trying to recover losses, QuickSeller, bodgy and more of this "dirty dozen"  being total cunts and throwing scam accusations here and there and finally a legendary "cunt" who has no idea that he is talking in a scam accusation thread where defendants reserve right to defend their name.  

You think saying "cunt" makes you sound clever? Nobody is stopping DaDice from attempting to defend themselves. They just aren't very good at it, since they are guilty as charged and have no defence other than to attack people and say they aren't interested.

Looks Like You Guys Didn't Know This Before. Allow Me To Break It To You!   Anyone Who Does Not Lick Twat of Dooglus Is Not Welcome Here. That Is What I Do With All The Time!  

- QuickSellerTwatLicker

Is There Some Kind Of Competition Where The Dumbest Asshole To Post Wins A Prize?

I think you just won.

[NLNico]

So when you play on DaDice, you just gotta hope they are not bankrupt? Maybe they only have like 10 coins left, no one knows... If there was only a way to prove you hold a certain amount of bitcoin?! so they could reassure us with the claimed 500+ BTC.

[dooglus]

So when you play on DaDice, you just gotta hope they are not bankrupt? Maybe they only have like 10 coins left, no one knows... If there was only a way to prove you hold a certain amount of bitcoin?! so they could reassure us with the claimed 500+ BTC.

Yes but:

a) you're a class-A whore
b) we've already discussed this and are no longer interested
c) we paid out in the past and so that proves we will also pay out in the future even if we don't have the coins available

Any other "convincing" arguments?

d) NLNicoDicko. Geddit?

QED.

[bodgybrothers]

As i said their behavior it's pretty bad and it does not help them in any way, yes there might not be a definitive proof of them being scammers but i seriously don't see how acting like that makes your site look any better, you had the chance of clearing your name by showing proof of funds and you didnt want to although you said yourself that one of your priorities is to be trusted and honest.

The only bad behavior is from the OP. We just defended ourselves. On the other side, I have decided to halt any campaigns here until further notice, as from tomorrow, since we receive 80% of our business from sites other then btctalk. So we can nicely survive without this permanent bullshit here.

You'll find this is because there are cash flow problems, not because of this thread.

It's also funny that the PR agency you mentioned has only one client to tweet about?

we even hired 3rd party marketing team for this purpose

https://twitter.com/mixedideaz

The tweets read the same as "Steve" from dadice. I think he was meant to tweet as dadice and retweet as the PR agency.


And for some reason they stopped tweeting in April...