[unmoderated]Re: ACE - AD Campaign Experts - advertising shady site

[Quickseller]

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

Have you looked at their lending portion of their site? 1) there is no clear way that they are able to pay interest on their deposits 2) they have a relatively large minimum deposit (.3 BTC) 3) they offer ridiculous offers to be able to take out a loan, provided that a borrower lend them at least 5 BTC over 6 months, something along the lines of being able to take out huge 10+ BTC loans (IIRC) interest free for several months, without any kind of income or asset verification (and without collateral).

The fact that they are not even using a new address for each customer, but instead ask customers to tell them what address they are sending "from" should alone set off red flags. All this is in addition to the fact they are a brand new site/company with zero history.

Anyone advertising a ponzi can write a similar disclaimer that they are not responsible if what they are advertising turns out to be a scam, that they are not responsible, on a thread that most people viewing your signature will most likely even see. This doesn't change the fact that this hypothetical person is advertising a ponzi. This also wouldn't change the fact that someone may have had their money stolen as a result of them viewing your signatures.

Continued from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1547364.0

Reposting here in an unmoderated thread.

[1714186748]

1714186748

[1714186748]

1714186748

[Quickseller]

The above started from this:

Who is in charge of selecting companies to advertise for?

Did none of you do any kind of research regarding the legitimacy of the company you are advertising?

I hope you all realize that when people start to realize that the website you are advertising has scammed them, they are going to think all of you are behind that website, which BTW, doesn't even use unique addresses for each customer

Who is in charge of selecting companies to advertise for?

All of us are. We held an internal vote.

Did none of you do any kind of research regarding the legitimacy of the company you are advertising?

We did do research, and we did not find anything to be a scam.

I hope you all realize that when people start to realize that the website you are advertising has scammed them, they are going to think all of you are behind that website, which BTW, doesn't even use unique addresses for each customer

Then we will point them to this point in our T&C:

ACE can not be held accountable for any misdoings by the client.

And promptly enact this point in the T&C:

ACE reserves the right to cancel a contract at any point in time if they conclude that the said company has lost its reputation. In this case no returns/refunds will be issued unless otherwise decided by the group.

[Quickseller]

I received the following message:

Have you looked at their lending portion of their site? 1) there is no clear way that they are able to pay interest on their deposits 2) they have a relatively large minimum deposit (.3 BTC) 3) they offer ridiculous offers to be able to take out a loan, provided that a borrower lend them at least 5 BTC over 6 months, something along the lines of being able to take out huge 10+ BTC loans (IIRC) interest free for several months, without any kind of income or asset verification (and without collateral).

Every single member has been asked to review the website during the voting period. This, while unusual, does not make them a scam. It may make them unproffesional.

The fact that they are not even using a new address for each customer, but instead ask customers to tell them what address they are sending "from" should alone set off red flags. All this is in addition to the fact they are a brand new site/company with zero history.

Innocent until proven guilty. Even their Mixer works in an unusual way, but it was tested by our members and it had worked as advertised.

To which I responded with:

Have you looked at their lending portion of their site? 1) there is no clear way that they are able to pay interest on their deposits 2) they have a relatively large minimum deposit (.3 BTC) 3) they offer ridiculous offers to be able to take out a loan, provided that a borrower lend them at least 5 BTC over 6 months, something along the lines of being able to take out huge 10+ BTC loans (IIRC) interest free for several months, without any kind of income or asset verification (and without collateral).

Every single member has been asked to review the website during the voting period. This, while unusual, does not make them a scam. It may make them unproffesional.

What do you think their business plan is? it looks to me like a brand new user is asking people to trust him with large amounts of money and giving people reasons why they should keep their money in their site for a long time (to allow them to avoid being called out as a scam). 

The fact that they are not even using a new address for each customer, but instead ask customers to tell them what address they are sending "from" should alone set off red flags. All this is in addition to the fact they are a brand new site/company with zero history.

Innocent until proven guilty. Even their Mixer works in an unusual way, but it was tested by our members and it had worked as advertised.

This makes it look to me that someone with little coding skills is trying to start a business that requires a lot of coding skills, increasing the likelihood of both hacks and "hacks"

[ajareselde]

1. Don't you have anything smarter to do other than to comment on other people's signatures ?

2. You have illegal unlicenced casino in your signature ad space, but that's ok,right ?

3. This doesn't belong in services section, belongs to service discussion at best..

[DarkStar_]

1. Don't you have anything smarter to do other than to comment on other people's signatures ?

I would say protection people from being scammed is a smart thing to do. Are you saying that just because a service is advertised in someone's signature means that it is legit?

2. You have illegal unlicenced casino in your signature ad space, but that's ok,right ?

Yes, and a casino that has a worthless license that can be bought with little verification, pays people to lie about things and is shady is much better, right? Crypto-Games hasn't scammed anyone, but Betcoin.ag has.

Also, can't forget about this: https://twitter.com/ajareselde/status/752258770445692929

3. This doesn't belong in services section, belongs to service discussion at best..

The only valid point in your post.

waits for him to say something about me being a crypto-games affiliate in his reply

[ajareselde]

1. Don't you have anything smarter to do other than to comment on other people's signatures ?

I would say protection people from being scammed is a smart thing to do. Are you saying that just because a service is advertised in someone's signature means that it is legit?

Who got scammed ? Noone did. And when we're talking about who can get scammed, then we can talk about crypto-games.net as well, because they have more
incentive than anyone run away, being illegal and unlicenced.

2. You have illegal unlicenced casino in your signature ad space, but that's ok,right ?

Yes, and a casino that has a worthless license that can be bought with little verification, pays people to lie about things and is shady is much better, right? Crypto-Games hasn't scammed anyone, but Betcoin.ag has.

Also, can't forget about this: https://twitter.com/ajareselde/status/752258770445692929

Who did they scam ? Jasonort ? It's funny because even he said that he doesn't consider betcoin a scam.

Do I think it is an outright scam?  No more than any other casino (the house always has the edge). 

Only people with crypto-games tag are doing so, while they're advertising an illegal casino in the meantime.

[Avirunes]

2. You have illegal unlicenced casino in your signature ad space, but that's ok,right ?

Yes, and a casino that has a worthless license that can be bought with little verification, pays people to lie about things and is shady is much better, right? Crypto-Games hasn't scammed anyone, but Betcoin.ag has.

Also, can't forget about this: https://twitter.com/ajareselde/status/752258770445692929

Who did they scam ? Jasonort ? It's funny because even he said that he doesn't consider betcoin a scam.

Giving a fraction of the jackpot that he was entitled to get seems fair to you? Lets say you get a fraction of your entitled signature campaign payout then what will you think about it? Will it be fair?

It doesn't matter how much they gave it to him. What matters is that they gave him some amount to shut his mouth instead of giving the jacpot that he was entitled to get. Maybe this time it was jasonort who shut his mouth what about next time?? Will betcoin.ag will continue to keep those sucking casino games and when somebody hits the jackpot they continue to give only small fraction?

Do I think it is an outright scam?  No more than any other casino (the house always has the edge).  

Only people with crypto-games tag are doing so, while they're advertising an illegal casino in the meantime.

Care to answer about this : https://twitter.com/ajareselde/status/752258770445692929 as Darkstar_ pointed out

[hatshepsut93]

2. You have illegal unlicenced casino in your signature ad space, but that's ok,right ?

You are saying "illegal unlicenced" like it's something bad. Don't you realize that most people involved in Bitcoin don't care about government regulations?

[ajareselde]

Giving a fraction of the jackpot that he was entitled to get seems fair to you? Lets say you get a fraction of your entitled signature campaign payout then what will you think about it? Will it be fair?

It doesn't matter how much they gave it to him. What matters is that they gave him some amount to shut his mouth instead of giving the jacpot that he was entitled to get. Maybe this time it was jasonort who shut his mouth what about next time?? Will betcoin.ag will continue to keep those sucking casino games and when somebody hits the jackpot they continue to give only small fraction?

The whole situation was explained many times over and over again, and if you missed some of it, i welcome you to go to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1517648.0 and read up.
There can't be a  "next one" with same situation as Jason, because rules are clear now. When someone hits jackpot now, they will be paid out if it's not from free spin, duh.
In regards to that tweet; i was participating in their twitter campaign, is that a crime ? (Oh, wait, since crypto-games is an illegal casino - It is !)

p.s. look at the thread title and op - we can continue on https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1517648.0 , before getting totally ot.

2. You have illegal unlicenced casino in your signature ad space, but that's ok,right ?

You are saying "illegal unlicenced" like it's something bad. Don't you realize that most people involved in Bitcoin don't care about government regulations?

Because there is nothing and noone who protects their customers in case they flee. Having an investment option, therefore customer funds is just another flag.

[Lutpin]

In regards to that tweet; i was participating in their twitter campaign, is that a crime ? (Oh, wait, since crypto-games is an illegal casino - It is !)

Just to get this straight, you're saying you have comitted what is considered a crime (in your jurisdiction) and you're publicly admitting doing so?
(http://archive.is/etXwa#selection-7021.26-7021.152)

~snip~

Look at this, what's next? Rollin.io harassing the poor & innocent betcoin.ag guys.

~snip~

You guys at satoshigames.io stop this crusade against the honorable betcoin.ag staff. This is madness!

[ajareselde]

In regards to that tweet; i was participating in their twitter campaign, is that a crime ? (Oh, wait, since crypto-games is an illegal casino - It is !)

Just to get this straight, you're saying you have comitted what is considered a crime (in your jurisdiction) and you're publicly admitting doing so?
(http://archive.is/etXwa#selection-7021.26-7021.152)

In my country it is not regulated, but i'm not sure for Slovenia.

[Heutenamos]

Don't you realize that most people involved in Bitcoin don't care about government regulations?

I am involved in Bitcoin and I don't care about house edge. Please let me win hundreds of coins , make a dice favorable to the players.

You don't run a business based on the mentality of the gamblers. The only reasons to not have a license are either you are not allowed to offer such businesses in your country or you are waiting to do a runner.

So guys CG is basically an illegal/unlicensed platform for those who don't care about government regulations , got it ?

nice to know.

[Lutpin]

You don't run a business based on the mentality of the gamblers. The only reasons to not have a license are either you are not allowed to offer such businesses in your country or you are waiting to do a runner.
So guys CG is basically an illegal/unlicensed platform for those who don't care about government regulations , got it ?
nice to know.

Same goes for Primedice, Betking, Rollin and countless others.

[klaaas]

...
...

As i read it, you are concerned about LegendsofTomorrow.
With all these concerns you have, i assume you did already shoot LegendsofTomorrow a pm/dm/mail ?!

The standards are high at ACE., as we can see at the noted T&C.
No worries there at all.

[Quickseller]

...
...

As i read it, you are concerned about LegendsofTomorrow.
With all these concerns you have, i assume you did already shoot LegendsofTomorrow a pm/dm/mail ?!

My concerns are us-disputable facts about LegondsOfTomorrow. The fact is that they are a company that has literally zero history is asking to be trusted with large amounts of money. One might say that the prudent thing for anyone to do is to research this company prior to trusting them with your money, however part of this research would include seeing who is endorsing them, and several users with large amounts of trust are endorsing them via their signature.  

The standards are high at ACE., as we can see at the noted T&C.
No worries there at all.

The TOS/T&C are worthless to anyone who is viewing their signatures. There is no reason for anyone reading any member of "ACE"'s posts to read an obscure thread. Anyone who wants to be responsible with what they advertise will only advertise services that they can logically say there is a very low chance is a scam, not make some BS disclaimer that they are not responsible if what they are advertising is a scam.

The standards are clearly very low at ACE, and evidenced by what they are willing to advertise.

I would also question who exactly you are, and what your relationship with ACE is.

Another PM from Lauda, and my responses:

What do you think their business plan is? it looks to me like a brand new user is asking people to trust him with large amounts of money and giving people reasons why they should keep their money in their site for a long time (to allow them to avoid being called out as a scam).  

I can't say much about the Investment part (as the time they contacted us, this part was TBA and the signature was on hold until they released it) as it came very late during a period in which I was practically inactive. However, generally I got the impression that they are genuinely trying to enter the crypto-ecosystem. I have talked to 2 of their representatives (support staff I believe) and they have signed 2 messages (IIRC) with over 50 BTC in them.

Their deposit address has addresses that are spendlinked that have roughly 39BTC in them, however the fact that they are in possession of 50BTC is meaningless.

This makes it look to me that someone with little coding skills is trying to start a business that requires a lot of coding skills, increasing the likelihood of both hacks and "hacks"

Well, it isn't unusual as in improperly coded. AFAIK they process it manually and use a completely different address to send the funds out to the participants. While this does have implications (it's not "scam-proof") it gives a certain edge to it (if I'm right, it's near impossible to hack this setup as it's likely that the funding address is on another system).

Or maybe this is just an indication that someone put very little effort into what is fairly clearly a scam attempt.

Don't you realize that most people involved in Bitcoin don't care about government regulations?

I am involved in Bitcoin and I don't care about house edge. Please let me win hundreds of coins , make a dice favorable to the players.

You don't run a business based on the mentality of the gamblers. The only reasons to not have a license are either you are not allowed to offer such businesses in your country or you are waiting to do a runner.

So guys CG is basically an illegal/unlicensed platform for those who don't care about government regulations , got it ?

nice to know.

I think you forgot to say BINGO

1. Don't you have anything smarter to do other than to comment on other people's signatures ?

No.

edit:
According to their T&C

T&C:

• The service should be in business at least for 3 months.[/u]
• The signature should include a link to the ACE thread.

The service ACE is advertising has not been in business for 3 months. According to the very first post of the account behind the service they are advertising, their service was planning to launch in late June, being that it is now the beginning of August, the service has been in business for no more then 1.5 months. Also the signature does not include a link to the ACE thread.

[LegendsofTomorrow]

Their deposit address has addresses that are spendlinked that have roughly 39BTC in them, however the fact that they are in possession of 50BTC is meaningless.

i would like to confirm this.

Quickseller is speaking about our mixing service address.

this address has been used BEFORE our launch, and since a lot of users used to mix on our old mixer using the address, we were requested by them to continue using the address itself.

however if you check the past deposits on the address and the day we launched the new website, you would realise the past deposits had over 20 bitcoins and from launch of the organisation Legends of Tomorrow, there are just around 10btc that have been sent to mixed.

as for the retraction of investments, let me clarify that every investor was made aware of this, and they support the reason also.

if you really want to know why, well, we exchanged it for usd on cex.io a few minutes after bitfinex hack. then rebought at lower still on cex.io

the funds were deposited in another address to which we have signed and proved to our investors. the investors are the one who are entitled to the funds not Quickseller so i am in no position to provide quickseller's weird mind proof of anything.

however if quickseller wants more proof of our funds.

sure we can sign another address of 60btc if he wants.

50btc address was already signed before the ACE campaign started to prevent this type of misguidance. but alas. we forgot Quickseller and his FUD spreading comments.

all investors are given a small review of how their funds were used at the end of each 4weeks. if Quickseller wants, we can give him a snip of the situation. or even post it on public. no worries.

i would like to add that, we are currently building a casino as well as a crowdfunding website along with a charity website. all charity funds will be directly sent to bitcoin charity organisation's address. we are just the transmitter of the message including one for ross.

Quickseller, funny how you try bust scam and point fingers at others when you have been scamming for months using your trust score and by self escrowing your deals.

till now nobody has claimed not receiving their funds in any of our services.

Quickseller, if you say that a new company asking funds bla bla bla. if we follow your message, then every new company that wants to go big in a system should not exist and are 100% a scam.

please do yourself a favor, find something else to do on the forum than fud spreading our work.

ps. your signature campaign or whatever is being said about it, does not concern us. so we refrain ourselves from commenting on that.

[LegendsofTomorrow]

Or maybe this is just an indication that someone put very little effort into what is fairly clearly a scam attempt.

sorry didnt see this one.

so now neither hot wallet nor cold wallet is useful then?

what should we do? tell Quickseller to escrow the funds?

[Quickseller]

Gotta say it all feels a bit 'Coin Telegraph' to me if you're not going to discriminate between obviously shady operations wanting to leach off your good reputations and legitimately trustworthy businesses and services.

That 'Legends of Tomorrow' you're currently wearing reeks of scam. They talk a huge game about not needing any investment funds and how all deposits will remain in their deposit address, only for them to then move the money they had there with some excuse about how they used it for trading!

If I recall didn't somebody like OGNasty recently get in a kerfuffle over refusing to remove a scam signature because he said he'd been paid for it and so was going to wear it until the paid period had ended, right? Well if you receive money to advertise a service which you then learn is shady as fuck, you are perfectly entitled to remove that advertisement without reimbursing the scammers. So I don't understand the logic of his refusal to do so in that case and in this case I don't understand why you're so willing to sully your own names for a clearly shady operation.

By choosing the morally-bankrupt 'CT' standard of advertising you just end up becoming mired in one scandal after another with people who lose money blaming you for encouraging them to trust in the shady operation you were promoting which ended up running off with their bitcoin.

You'd be far better off operating on the principal that any valid concerns raised about a service you are advertising needs to be objectively countered by the operators of that service or you will remove the signature until they offer up a sufficient degree of proof they are running a legitimate and trustworthy service.

This way the value of your signature space as a group will increase exponentially as it will be far more trusted than most.

It's win-win for you.

We've not found them to be a scam. Nobody has complained to us, or to anyone, that they're a scam. Let me know why you think they're a scam and please try to show some evidence or good reasoning.

A warning about Legonds of Tomorrow was posted in the ACE thread a long time ago, however my post was promptly deleted by Lauda

[Anduck]

Gotta say it all feels a bit 'Coin Telegraph' to me if you're not going to discriminate between obviously shady operations wanting to leach off your good reputations and legitimately trustworthy businesses and services.

That 'Legends of Tomorrow' you're currently wearing reeks of scam. They talk a huge game about not needing any investment funds and how all deposits will remain in their deposit address, only for them to then move the money they had there with some excuse about how they used it for trading!

If I recall didn't somebody like OGNasty recently get in a kerfuffle over refusing to remove a scam signature because he said he'd been paid for it and so was going to wear it until the paid period had ended, right? Well if you receive money to advertise a service which you then learn is shady as fuck, you are perfectly entitled to remove that advertisement without reimbursing the scammers. So I don't understand the logic of his refusal to do so in that case and in this case I don't understand why you're so willing to sully your own names for a clearly shady operation.

By choosing the morally-bankrupt 'CT' standard of advertising you just end up becoming mired in one scandal after another with people who lose money blaming you for encouraging them to trust in the shady operation you were promoting which ended up running off with their bitcoin.

You'd be far better off operating on the principal that any valid concerns raised about a service you are advertising needs to be objectively countered by the operators of that service or you will remove the signature until they offer up a sufficient degree of proof they are running a legitimate and trustworthy service.

This way the value of your signature space as a group will increase exponentially as it will be far more trusted than most.

It's win-win for you.

We've not found them to be a scam. Nobody has complained to us, or to anyone, that they're a scam. Let me know why you think they're a scam and please try to show some evidence or good reasoning.

A warning about Legonds of Tomorrow was posted in the ACE thread a long time ago, however my post was promptly deleted by Lauda

Your post was offtopic, as you very well know.

[Quickseller]

It was not. It was pointing out that a "disclaimer" on some random thread is useless and does not absolve someone from advertising a ponzi and/or a known scam.

[LegendsofTomorrow]

It was not. It was pointing out that a "disclaimer" on some random thread is useless and does not absolve someone from advertising a ponzi and/or a known scam.

anyone claimed we scam them? no.

[Quickseller]

Lauda continues to delete posts critical of his decisions and that point out his inconsistency

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

Gotta say it all feels a bit 'Coin Telegraph' to me if you're not going to discriminate between obviously shady operations wanting to leach off your good reputations and legitimately trustworthy businesses and services.

That 'Legends of Tomorrow' you're currently wearing reeks of scam. They talk a huge game about not needing any investment funds and how all deposits will remain in their deposit address, only for them to then move the money they had there with some excuse about how they used it for trading!

If I recall didn't somebody like OGNasty recently get in a kerfuffle over refusing to remove a scam signature because he said he'd been paid for it and so was going to wear it until the paid period had ended, right? Well if you receive money to advertise a service which you then learn is shady as fuck, you are perfectly entitled to remove that advertisement without reimbursing the scammers. So I don't understand the logic of his refusal to do so in that case and in this case I don't understand why you're so willing to sully your own names for a clearly shady operation.

By choosing the morally-bankrupt 'CT' standard of advertising you just end up becoming mired in one scandal after another with people who lose money blaming you for encouraging them to trust in the shady operation you were promoting which ended up running off with their bitcoin.

You'd be far better off operating on the principal that any valid concerns raised about a service you are advertising needs to be objectively countered by the operators of that service or you will remove the signature until they offer up a sufficient degree of proof they are running a legitimate and trustworthy service.

This way the value of your signature space as a group will increase exponentially as it will be far more trusted than most.

It's win-win for you.

We've not found them to be a scam. Nobody has complained to us, or to anyone, that they're a scam. Let me know why you think they're a scam and please try to show some evidence or good reasoning.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1576799.msg15831328#msg15831328 <<-- unmoderated thread here. It turns out that a warning about LOT was posted in this very thread a long time ago but was deleted by the OP

[Quickseller]

If anyone wants to discuss ACE in an unmoderated thread, you can post here.

It recently came to light that one of ACE's members is an extortionist -- it might not be a good idea to have that kind of person representing your brand