coinjedi / betsofbitco.in SCAMMERS: Declares "Push" on obvious win for BFL bet

[darkmule]

As for Luke - By siding with the losing side on this with his supposedly-clever word-playing, he comes off, at the very least, as a major a bull***t artist. It's the same kind of bull***t artistry I got used to seeing from BFL over the time I've been following them since I ordered (and now - waiting for my refund).

Whether or not he's an actual scammer, and frankly, it looks like he is, it completely blows any remaining credibility this so-called betting service ever had.  Nobody who intends their bets to be honored will ever place a bet again with this ripoff operation.

[1713948197]

1713948197

[1713948197]

1713948197

[Syke]

From what I'm hearing a certain competitor to betsofbitco.in didn't have any problems in determining a clear outcome to the same bet...

betsofbitco.in allowed for +/- 25% on hashrate (which was met)

Which product are you referring to? The bet clearly specified 3 products. Were you testing a Jalapeno?

http://news.yahoo.com/butterfly-labs-announces-next-generation-asic-lineup-054626776.html

1)    BitForce SC Jalapeno: a USB powered coffee warmer providing 3.5 GH/s, priced at under $149

2)    BitForce SC Single: a standalone unit providing roughly 40 GH/s, priced at $1,299

3)    BitForce SC Mini Rig: a case & rack mount server providing 1 TH/s, priced at $29,899

[Minor Miner]

Agree, the website and the pusher of the site should have a scammer tag.

[Littleshop]

There really is no ambiguity.  The only issue is how many of the points listed in the bet were not met.  It is clear to anyone reasonable the TERMS of shipping were not met, the timeframe was not met and the no employee clause was not met. 

It is great news that BFL has a working prototype of some form, but this does not meet the clearly stated terms of the bet. 

It takes a LONG TIME to build up a reputation for a betting site.  I really did like BoB and was a (small time) customer there.  I will no longer bet there. This is a clear example that they make up the rules as they go along.  Will a game be called a tie because it was close next? 

That all being said, no scammer tag vote here.  The mods can go after real scammers but they should not be the judge of the quality of a betting site unless the betting site actually steals customer money.  And even under that this is a close call for me, because not paying out on a clearly stated bet is pretty close to stealing from the winner. 

[Transisto]

I had no stake in this bet ... but
Some have lost so much to BFL already and used this to hedge their purchase.

The device is arguably NOT A DEVICE, and LukeJR is arguably NOT A CUSTOMER.

Fail, Fail and ...
• The device must achieve at least 75% of its advertised hashrate.
FAIL !
How retarded do you have to be to confuse 75% of advertised hashrate with ~50% ?

Rest In Peace betsofbitco.in we've lost enough time with you.

[nathanrees19]

I'm not giving him a scammer tag. By using betsofbitco.in, you agreed that betsofbitco.in staff would be the ones to decide events. It's none of my business how he does this.

So if they decide bets based on who pays them the most under the table, would they still not be tagged as a scammer?

Scammer tags here truly are useless.

Oh no! The tag doesn't apply to every possible situation that you don't like! It must be useless.

[nathanrees19]

This is pretty much an argument to ignorance. If you gamble, lose, and refund

This is pretty much an argument to what the fuck. You're describing the situation as if the judge and the betters were the same person, who refunded themself when they lost.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

I have the utmost respect for the crew running the mag.

You're like the only one.

<snip>

I'm battin' a 1000 then, for you won't believe how high I rated InstaWallet.

(took no offense to your post, and do respect you (seriously))

[Phinnaeus Gage]

I had no stake in this bet ... but
Some have lost so much to BFL already and used this to hedge their purchase.

<snip>

I'm having a very bad day which is rare for me, so forgive my tone, but...

If I understand correctly that MNW was given the tag because people hedged their position against Pirate and lost, then the same exact consideration would apply here if only I person (though possibly more) lost out due to them hedging their position.

On that note, I don't believe BoB deserves a scammer tag for the same exact reason now that MNW deserved one, for both situations are identical.

Feel free to set my thinking straight on this particular aspect, for I'm not really in the right state of mind right now due to IW going down. And what the fuck is going on over at Mt. Gox? Is day just a dream, or are aliens probing me--again?

~Bruno K~

[darkmule]

BoB, the fake betting site, basically did exactly what MNW did, for which he got a scammer tag.

If one side of the bet had come in, in favor of BFL, then they'd have paid out.

When the other side came in, clearly and unambiguously, they said ha ha, just kidding.  That's a scam.

[Bogart]

They should really clarify that all times refer to GMT unless otherwise specified.

http://betsofbitco.in/help

In "What is the difference between deadline and event date?"

All dates refer to end of day Eastern Time.

[MPOE-PR]

I'm battin' a 1000 then, for you won't believe how high I rated InstaWallet.

(took no offense to your post, and do respect you (seriously))

That's okay, because while I had no clue wtf instawallet even is, I did say a few times that the bitcoin-central thing is pretty much the only trustable exchange. Of course I was going on the legal stuff, but still.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

BoB, the fake betting site, basically did exactly what MNW did, for which he got a scammer tag.

If one side of the bet had come in, in favor of BFL, then they'd have paid out.

When the other side came in, clearly and unambiguously, they said ha ha, just kidding.  That's a scam.

I'm not going to give Matthew N. Wright a scammer tag. By betting in his game, you agree that he will decide the outcome.

[Transisto]

I think the line between being a scammer and willfully being a clueless moron has been crossed often enough in bitcoinland.

We are talking of more than 70 000$ wagered... with little to no thoughtful process given on the outcome.


Scammer tag please.

And +1 to Genjix , Phantomcircuit and Zhougon while at it.

[Deprived]

Nothing wrong with saying the bet was badly worded and couldn't be resolved.

So long as both sides get paid out as though they won.  Then it would be a great gesture from the site - to pay both sides (not refund, pay out in full) when BFL clearly didn't deliver.  If the site thinks THEY screwed up by offering a flawed bet then, rather obviously, the site should be the one to absorb any financial loss resulting from it.

Obviously what they've actually done is either a scam or gross incompetence.  The reasons why have already been clearly detailed - which (scam or incompetence) is anyone's guess.  I'd tend towards shipping a scammer tag then let them prove they really ARE That stupid to get it removed.

[phelix]

I had no stake in this bet ... but
Some have lost so much to BFL already and used this to hedge their purchase.

The device is arguably NOT A DEVICE, and LukeJR is arguably NOT A CUSTOMER.

Fail, Fail and ...
• The device must achieve at least 75% of its advertised hashrate.
FAIL !
How retarded do you have to be to confuse 75% of advertised hashrate with ~50% ?

Rest In Peace betsofbitco.in we've lost enough time with you.

this.

also: ship - transitive verb -  "to cause to be transported"

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ship

[BR0KK]

Our reasoning is already on the page, so I will not repeat it here. We do our best to judge by the user written descriptions of statements. Unfortunately sometimes the outcome is not as unambiguous as we want. I guess that is why lawyer-talk evolved to be so convoluted. This particular case does not meet the unambiguity criteria we set ourselves.

Everybody got their full bet back, including the original submission fee. We could choose to select one side and earn a significant commission, enough to buy a nice laptop these days, but we didn't.

I respect everybody who thinks that we didn't judge well enough, but scamming is a different matter. I hope at least some of the bettors understand and respect our decision when the dust settles.

Somehow i think you you just signed your service to death.....


MNW got a "Scammer Tag" for weaseling out of his (stupid joke ass bet that none should have taken serious in the first place....jm2BTC) and now your service is doing the same thing?!

[nathanrees19]

BoB, the fake betting site

They disagree with me on one decision, therefore it's a fake betting site.

basically did exactly what MNW did

The circumstances were completely different, but I feel just as upset, therefore it's exactly the same.

[Luke-Jr]

Well this will be interesting.... Lets see if BoB try to Push this one

http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=1352

Butterfly Labs Will Ship Before Mid-April 2013
Butterfly Labs (BFL_Josh) have stated that the first shipment will be dispatched before the last week of March 2013.

To qualify as a 'Agree', a Butterfly Labs customer must acknowledge receipt of an ASIC unit, test it and have it perform within advertised specifications by the 14th April 2013. The post confirming the status has to be on either BitcoinTalk or Butterfly Labs forums with conclusive evidence (video etc)

All Butterfly Labs employees or affiliates are discounted.

1: Although 1 person has 'received' a BFL ASIC (Luke-Jr) he is an affiliate at this point in time (as a developer working on software for the ASICs).

2: "Must perform within advertised specifications"..... well BFL changed the advertised specs today (https://products.butterflylabs.com/ upping the price whilst dropping the specs..... classy!).

3. At the time of the bet opening it was not known that the power consumption was over the limit (another failure for advertised specs).


I will be interested to know if a Push will be declared.

This bet is clearly already lost for the pro-BFL side. There is no way they're meeting advertised specs exactly, and they're current schedule says late April.

[creativex]

This bet is clearly already lost for the pro-BFL side. There is no way they're meeting advertised specs exactly, and they're current schedule says late April.

Agreed, but that was true of the last bet as well. Yet some scammy actions by yourself, inblahblah, and BOB and tada...DRAW!