bustabit – The original crash game

[JollyGood]

bustadice and bustabit are both owned by myself and share some code. I'm not in dispute with BetKing and Dean doesn't owe me anything. Since it doesn't affect bustadice I kindly ask you to discuss it in a more appropriate thread.

Regarding the allegation made that Dean Nolan from betking owed 2 BTC for outstanding licence fees: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4751127.msg47317090#msg47317090

betking was listed here in the scammer list: https://www.bustabit.com/license.txt as "Sites that are violating the terms of bustabit's open source license and should not be considered trustworthy"

A couple of days after the allegation was made in the thread, betking was removed from the scammer list.

You mentioned you have no dispute with Dean Nolan or betking but were you or Bustabit or Bustadice in dispute before that post was made, say last week, last month or ever?

Did Dean Nolan or betking recently make a payment to get betking removed from the licence.txt page?

When and why was betking added to the list in the first place and why was it removed from that list a couple of days ago?

Thank you

[1714866447]

1714866447

[1714866447]

1714866447

[1714866447]

1714866447

[1714866447]

1714866447

[JollyGood]

Sadly, this takes BaB from a revolutionary social gambling game to a much slower dice roll. 

For better or worse, this is how the majority of our players were already playing it. I understand that the bonus system in particular distinguished bustabit from other games, but most players didn't compete for the bonus and were essentially being taken advantage of by the few that did.

First off, saying that it was "taking advantage" is pretty insulting and frankly misleading as that was the goal of the game.  It was explained indepth in the rules and in giant letters and numbers on the screen. 

Secondly, I'd love to see some stats.  I'm sure Ryan has access to them, I wonder if he'd share what % of players on BaB were at -.5% or worse lifetime for the bonus.  Since those are the only players that this change helps and you are claiming that this change helps well over 50% of the players.

Either way, my point still stands.  BaB is now a much slower dice game.  Hopefully you have some plans to throw in some interesting variations or modifications, I know Ryan was talking last month about launching a game with a 100% bonus.  I hope those plans haven't been scraped.

I am not too familiar with the background to this website and the game but it seems from your post that bustabit was originally owned by somebody else then was purchased by the OP.

Please can somebody confirm

[devans]

Regarding the allegation made that Dean Nolan from betking owed 2 BTC for outstanding licence fees: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4751127.msg47317090#msg47317090

betking was listed here in the scammer list: https://www.bustabit.com/license.txt as "Sites that are violating the terms of bustabit's open source license and should not be considered trustworthy"

A couple of days after the allegation was made in the thread, betking was removed from the scammer list.

You mentioned you have no dispute with Dean Nolan or betking but were you or Bustabit or Bustadice in dispute before that post was made, say last week, last month or ever?

Did Dean Nolan or betking recently make a payment to get betking removed from the licence.txt page?

When and why was betking added to the list in the first place and why was it removed from that list a couple of days ago?

Thank you

BetKing launched its crash game using bustabit's source code without complying with its open source license or having purchased a paid license from bustabit. That's why I added betking.io to the list of sites pirating bustabit's software. After about ten days Dean finally took the game offline, so I removed it from the list again. Now it looks like he's relaunched the game still using slightly obfuscated bustabit code, but I'm not sure pursuing it is worth all the potential drama.

I am not too familiar with the background to this website and the game but it seems from your post that bustabit was originally owned by somebody else then was purchased by the OP.

Please can somebody confirm

I acquired bustabit in January of this year from Ryan, its previous owner.

[JollyGood]

Regarding the allegation made that Dean Nolan from betking owed 2 BTC for outstanding licence fees: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4751127.msg47317090#msg47317090

betking was listed here in the scammer list: https://www.bustabit.com/license.txt as "Sites that are violating the terms of bustabit's open source license and should not be considered trustworthy"

A couple of days after the allegation was made in the thread, betking was removed from the scammer list.

You mentioned you have no dispute with Dean Nolan or betking but were you or Bustabit or Bustadice in dispute before that post was made, say last week, last month or ever?

Did Dean Nolan or betking recently make a payment to get betking removed from the licence.txt page?

When and why was betking added to the list in the first place and why was it removed from that list a couple of days ago?

Thank you

BetKing launched its crash game using bustabit's source code without complying with its open source license or having purchased a paid license from bustabit. That's why I added betking.io to the list of sites pirating bustabit's software. After about ten days Dean finally took the game offline, so I removed it from the list again. Now it looks like he's relaunched the game still using slightly obfuscated bustabit code, but I'm not sure pursuing it is worth all the potential drama.

I am not too familiar with the background to this website and the game but it seems from your post that bustabit was originally owned by somebody else then was purchased by the OP.

Please can somebody confirm

I acquired bustabit in January of this year from Ryan, its previous owner.

Thank you devans, I appreciate the post.

I had some pieces of the jigsaw but not all of them so was reading between the lines. Your post sheds a lot of light on the curiosity I had.

With regards to Bustabit and Bustadice, I wish you success in your projects. Both seem to have a good reputation so I hope you do well with regards to your efforts.

Thank you

[BetKing Support]

Regarding the allegation made that Dean Nolan from betking owed 2 BTC for outstanding licence fees: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4751127.msg47317090#msg47317090

betking was listed here in the scammer list: https://www.bustabit.com/license.txt as "Sites that are violating the terms of bustabit's open source license and should not be considered trustworthy"

A couple of days after the allegation was made in the thread, betking was removed from the scammer list.

You mentioned you have no dispute with Dean Nolan or betking but were you or Bustabit or Bustadice in dispute before that post was made, say last week, last month or ever?

Did Dean Nolan or betking recently make a payment to get betking removed from the licence.txt page?

When and why was betking added to the list in the first place and why was it removed from that list a couple of days ago?

Thank you

BetKing launched its crash game using bustabit's source code without complying with its open source license or having purchased a paid license from bustabit. That's why I added betking.io to the list of sites pirating bustabit's software. After about ten days Dean finally took the game offline, so I removed it from the list again. Now it looks like he's relaunched the game still using slightly obfuscated bustabit code, but I'm not sure pursuing it is worth all the potential drama.

I am not too familiar with the background to this website and the game but it seems from your post that bustabit was originally owned by somebody else then was purchased by the OP.

Please can somebody confirm

I acquired bustabit in January of this year from Ryan, its previous owner.

There is not any Bustabit code in the relaunched version and we even use different libraries for graphing.

You know we were under the opinion, wrongly, that we were able to use that code after discussing it with RHavar.
Then we spoke and I asked if we could work something out which is why it was up so long. You didn't ask it to be taken down on day 1, it was about 7 days later you asked after we decided we were going to rewrite it anyway.

[devans]

You modified the code to support multiple currencies and you reformatted a few field names from snake_case to camelCase. Perhaps you even rewrote the graph rendering. But it's obvious to anyone that cares to look that BetKing is using bustabit's code. For instance, let's have a look at how the server communicates with the client. On the left is BetKing and on the right a casino using bustabit's v1 software (with permission).

Compare the state that's provided on connection:




Or when a game is starting:




And what the server sends when the game ends:




There are other "similarities" but I believe I've made my point. In any case, I'm over it. I'm just disappointed that you and BetKing would act this way.

[JollyGood]

You modified the code to support multiple currencies and you reformatted a few field names from snake_case to camelCase. Perhaps you even rewrote the graph rendering. But it's obvious to anyone that cares to look that BetKing is using bustabit's code. For instance, let's have a look at how the server communicates with the client. On the left is BetKing and on the right a casino using bustabit's v1 software (with permission).

Compare the state that's provided on connection:




Or when a game is starting:




And what the server sends when the game ends:




There are other "similarities" but I believe I've made my point. In any case, I'm over it. I'm just disappointed that you and BetKing would act this way.

Why would you say that? I would definitely expect Dean Nolan and betking to act in this very precise way !

-- Dean Nolan and betking accused me of taking money from Stake.com just because I said they had a great looking UI and great reputation. I uploaded the screenshot of his PM to the Stake thread and then Dean Nolan tried to talk his way out it by saying to the Stake team he meant something else  

-- Dean Nolan and betking have been accused of scamming so many people in the pocketrocketcasino affiliate scam and then continuing his affiliate scam with betking.

-- This is the same Dean Nolan and betking that ate in to the "profits" of the betking website using 30 million tokens that were dormant, therefore ICO and token investors got much less with their 70 million.

-- This is the same Dean Nolan and betking that said a new website was going to be paid from the ICO funds but he re-launched the same website he shutdown in 2016.

-- This is the same Dean Nolan and betking that said new games would be coded and were going to be paid from the ICO funds to be added to the new betking website but all he did was add plugin affiliates from livetables.io
Oh I forgot, he re-added the roulette game that he took down before the ICO and he showed it as a "new" game.

-- This is same Dean Nolan that claimed he gave away 25 Bitcoin to charities in December 2017 from 1st December to 25th December at 1 BTC a day as a gesture of kindness (and of-course paying for news and press releases advertising and promoting the non-existent endeavour) but never "proved" which charities he allegedly donated to.

The Dean Nolan and betking scam list goes on...

He could pay for all that nonsense to be promoted and a for a lie to be perpetuated but he could not pay just 2 BTC licence fee to use the Crash game? About the code being modified, yes it was minimally altered yet it is essentially the same code/game but a key thing to remember is that Dean Nolan could not code a single simple line to save his life. He gets his edits, updates and mods from hired help that he has no choice but to allow FTP and DB access to thus opening himself up for all sorts of issues in the very near future. Karma I hope.

If you all in the gambling and gaming community believe Dean Nolan and betking are a part of the "group" keeping each other protected and being polite to each other, you are wrong. Dean Nolan is a jealous little pathetic fool who wishes he was monopolising the crypto gaming/gambling world, he showed himself to be a disgusting imbecile in the PM he posted to me when attacking the Stake team so I uploaded it and shared it in the Stake thread.

There is not any Bustabit code in the relaunched version and we even use different libraries for graphing.

You know we were under the opinion, wrongly, that we were able to use that code after discussing it with RHavar.
Then we spoke and I asked if we could work something out which is why it was up so long. You didn't ask it to be taken down on day 1, it was about 7 days later you asked after we decided we were going to rewrite it anyway.

So going by that post, the fact that Dean Nolan and betking did not want to pay 2 BTC licence fee for the software he is using is supposed to be the OPs fault?

And following on from that, Dean Nolan and betking hired a coder to minimally move the code around just to claim it was wholly re-written?

betking and Dean Nolan are called scam and scammer, so many people in this forum say it.

[RHavar]

You know we were under the opinion, wrongly, that we were able to use that code after discussing it with RHavar.

This is absolutely ridiculous of you to drag me into this.  I neither said nor implied any such thing. I would normally be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and suggest maybe you misunderstood me, but we only spoke about it after you launched with pirated software.

But I do encourage you to share anything I said that might have given you a different impression. Just make sure you include enough context, like how you first started off with "we didn't just copy it but used reference" before then later admitting you were using a minified verbatim copy of bustabit (even including some pointless bustabit debug lines) both on the client and server, and asked about known problems or exploits in the specific version you're running. So there goes the "accidental infringement" defence. Ooops.

But reviewing our conversation, my advice was to follow the terms of the AGPLv3 version (releasing modified source code) and save you paying the small licensing fee. So please don't act like you were led astray (and not to mention: I'm not a lawyer or have any rights to the source code you're using) so my opinion is rather irrelevant anyway.

There is not any Bustabit code in the relaunched version and we even use different libraries for graphing.

That's obviously nonsense. Let's not pretend you reimplemented the entire thing in a couple days. It's exactly the same and has literally exactly the same rendering quirks and bugs that it did before. I can see you made a few obvious changes (stripped the debug lines, changed <canvas> to <svg> changed the fonts, stripped the noise function, renamed "GAME_TICK" to "CRASH_GAME_TICK" but as the original author to most of the code you're running, it's rather obvious you just spent a couple days obfuscating your previous blatant copyright infringement.

It's like you got a copy of a Harry Potter book, and find-and-replaced most of the characters and places names. Pretending it's your work is insulting.

And I'm going to be honest, I personally don't really care about copyright infringement (I pretty much pirate every movie I watch), but I do very much value honesty -- and find this whole situation extremely concerning.

And on that note, I'm not sure what's a bigger red-flag: That you raised millions of dollars with an ICO to supposedly help pay development, and then would rip Dan off for a rather insignificant once-off 2 bitcoin licensing fee. Or that you'd rather tarnish your brand and reputation over said fee.

I know Daniel said he's too busy to care, but I don't think what you're doing is fair. I intend on leaving negative trust, and petitioning the Crypto Gambling Foundation to revoke your membership, unless you can do the right thing and pay what is owed (and ideally provide a proof-of-solvency to show you are in the position to complete the terms of the buy-back program that your ICO tokens require).

[game-protect]

There are other "similarities" but I believe I've made my point. In any case, I'm over it. I'm just disappointed that you and BetKing would act this way.

Even though he scammed me as affiliate, I am not disappointed at all because there were already some warning signs before like in February the affiliate tracking for all affiliates did not work. Then later, referred players were removed from my affiliate list.

-- Dean Nolan and betking have been accused of scamming so many people in the pocketrocketcasino affiliate scam and then continuing his affiliate scam with betking.

Funny, I had no idea that pocketrocketcasino affiliates were already scammed.

To better warn the gambling community about this scam artist, I created this article that can be easily found when putting "betking + scam" into google:

BetKing scam

[JollyGood]

You know we were under the opinion, wrongly, that we were able to use that code after discussing it with RHavar.

This is absolutely ridiculous of you to drag me into this.  I neither said nor implied any such thing. I would normally be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and suggest maybe you misunderstood me, but we only spoke about it after you launched with pirated software.

But I do encourage you to share anything I said that might have given you a different impression. Just make sure you include enough context, like how you first started off with "we didn't just copy it but used reference" before then later admitting you were using a minified verbatim copy of bustabit (even including some pointless bustabit debug lines) both on the client and server, and asked about known problems or exploits in the specific version you're running. So there goes the "accidental infringement" defence. Ooops.

But reviewing our conversation, my advice was to follow the terms of the AGPLv3 version (releasing modified source code) and save you paying the small licensing fee. So please don't act like you were led astray (and not to mention: I'm not a lawyer or have any rights to the source code you're using) so my opinion is rather irrelevant anyway.

There is not any Bustabit code in the relaunched version and we even use different libraries for graphing.

That's obviously nonsense. Let's not pretend you reimplemented the entire thing in a couple days. It's exactly the same and has literally exactly the same rendering quirks and bugs that it did before. I can see you made a few obvious changes (stripped the debug lines, changed <canvas> to <svg> changed the fonts, stripped the noise function, renamed "GAME_TICK" to "CRASH_GAME_TICK" but as the original author to most of the code you're running, it's rather obvious you just spent a couple days obfuscating your previous blatant copyright infringement.

It's like you got a copy of a Harry Potter book, and find-and-replaced most of the characters and places names. Pretending it's your work is insulting.

And I'm going to be honest, I personally don't really care about copyright infringement (I pretty much pirate every movie I watch), but I do very much value honesty -- and find this whole situation extremely concerning.

And on that note, I'm not sure what's a bigger red-flag: That you raised millions of dollars with an ICO to supposedly help pay development, and then would rip Dan off for a rather insignificant once-off 2 bitcoin licensing fee. Or that you'd rather tarnish your brand and reputation over said fee.

I know Daniel said he's too busy to care, but I don't think what you're doing is fair. I intend on leaving negative trust, and petitioning the Crypto Gambling Foundation to revoke your membership, unless you can do the right thing and pay what is owed (and ideally provide a proof-of-solvency to show you are in the position to complete the terms of the buy-back program that your ICO tokens require).

I am sad and disappointed to read what Dean Nolan has been doing with regards to the Crash game but I am not surprised at all because it is true to form for him behave like this.

May I suggest that even if Dean Nolan and betking does finally pay the outstanding 2 BTC for stealing the software and if he does apologise to you for carrying out yet another scam in a along line of his scams, it would still open up questions about his business morals and ethics. On that basis should betking and Dean Nolan remain a member of the CGF?

[Stunna]

I know Daniel said he's too busy to care, but I don't think what you're doing is fair. I intend on leaving negative trust, and petitioning the Crypto Gambling Foundation to revoke your membership, unless you can do the right thing and pay what is owed (and ideally provide a proof-of-solvency to show you are in the position to complete the terms of the buy-back program that your ICO tokens require).

RHavar is one of the most reasonable people I've met in this entire community. He's been very helpful on a variety of issues and has always offered assistance without expecting anything in return which is why I consider him a friend. I'm not sure why there was such an attempt to effectively cheat one of the most respected operations in this scene out of 2BTC. And then instead of just apologizing and making it right, there have just been denials and cover-ups. I haven't seen an honest apology, I have to stick up for RHavar here given what I've seen the past week on this forum and privately.

[BetKing Support]

I know Daniel said he's too busy to care, but I don't think what you're doing is fair. I intend on leaving negative trust, and petitioning the Crypto Gambling Foundation to revoke your membership, unless you can do the right thing and pay what is owed (and ideally provide a proof-of-solvency to show you are in the position to complete the terms of the buy-back program that your ICO tokens require).

RHavar is one of the most reasonable people I've met in this entire community. He's been very helpful on a variety of issues and has always offered assistance without expecting anything in return which is why I consider him a friend. I'm not sure why there was such an attempt to effectively cheat one of the most respected operations in this scene out of 2BTC. And then instead of just apologizing and making it right, there have just been denials and cover-ups. I haven't seen an honest apology, I have to stick up for RHavar here given what I've seen the past week on this forum and privately.

There was no attempt to cheat anyone.
I'm not getting caught up in all the forum drama just so trolls have extra content to post in their threads.
Everyone here has already taken all my posts out of context and they will just ignore anything I say anyway.
 
I've messaged Ryan on Skype. I'm rather confused by the whole thing to be honest.

I won't be posting in this thread after this. Ryan and Daniel know how to contact me off this forum.

[JollyGood]

I know Daniel said he's too busy to care, but I don't think what you're doing is fair. I intend on leaving negative trust, and petitioning the Crypto Gambling Foundation to revoke your membership, unless you can do the right thing and pay what is owed (and ideally provide a proof-of-solvency to show you are in the position to complete the terms of the buy-back program that your ICO tokens require).

RHavar is one of the most reasonable people I've met in this entire community. He's been very helpful on a variety of issues and has always offered assistance without expecting anything in return which is why I consider him a friend. I'm not sure why there was such an attempt to effectively cheat one of the most respected operations in this scene out of 2BTC. And then instead of just apologizing and making it right, there have just been denials and cover-ups. I haven't seen an honest apology, I have to stick up for RHavar here given what I've seen the past week on this forum and privately.

There was no attempt to cheat anyone.
I'm not getting caught up in all the forum drama just so trolls have extra content to post in their threads.
Everyone here has already taken all my posts out of context and they will just ignore anything I say anyway.
 
I've messaged Ryan on Skype. I'm rather confused by the whole thing to be honest.

I won't be posting in this thread after this. Ryan and Daniel know how to contact me off this forum.

Dean Nolan you are a disgusting little imbecile. When you get exposed you say "I am rather confused" or "I never meant that" or "I didn't understand" or "There was no attempt to cheat anyone"

When I exposed your allegation against the Stake team you squirmed out of it by telling them "I did not mean that, I meant something else" even though you clearly made allegations against them. Aengus from the Stake team congratulated you when you opening your betking website even after the shameful scam ICO. They were generous to offering kind words even though you were in competition for the same space but you are a jealous little fool who pretends to be all "nicey-nice" but you wish ill on all your competitors: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2072589.msg45199982#msg45199982





---------------------






You cannot get out of this one Dean Nolan you disgusting scammer. Even if you apologise and even if you pay the overdue 2 BTC the fact is more people are now aware that you are a scammer and now know that you are getting worse and worse.

No more of anybody giving you the benefit of any doubt ever again.

You scam "colleagues" from the gaming/gambling community including those who have made positive posts about you in the past.

You scam gullible investors in the ICO by not following the whitepaper promises.

How much more lower can you go? Shame on you pathetic person, the Crash game is still on your betking website.

It is a well known fact in the forum that betking and Dean Nolan are known as scam and scammer.

[BoXXoB]

I'm quite surprised.

There was a time I had a certain amount of respect towards Dean but we're way past those times. I have no idea what reason Dean even has to be dishonest about anything like this. Especially if it all boils down to just 2 BTC.

You know we were under the opinion, wrongly, that we were able to use that code after discussing it with RHavar.

This is absolutely ridiculous of you to drag me into this.  I neither said nor implied any such thing. I would normally be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and suggest maybe you misunderstood me, but we only spoke about it after you launched with pirated software.

But I do encourage you to share anything I said that might have given you a different impression. Just make sure you include enough context, like how you first started off with "we didn't just copy it but used reference" before then later admitting you were using a minified verbatim copy of bustabit (even including some pointless bustabit debug lines) both on the client and server, and asked about known problems or exploits in the specific version you're running. So there goes the "accidental infringement" defence. Ooops.

But reviewing our conversation, my advice was to follow the terms of the AGPLv3 version (releasing modified source code) and save you paying the small licensing fee. So please don't act like you were led astray (and not to mention: I'm not a lawyer or have any rights to the source code you're using) so my opinion is rather irrelevant anyway.

There is not any Bustabit code in the relaunched version and we even use different libraries for graphing.

That's obviously nonsense. Let's not pretend you reimplemented the entire thing in a couple days. It's exactly the same and has literally exactly the same rendering quirks and bugs that it did before. I can see you made a few obvious changes (stripped the debug lines, changed <canvas> to <svg> changed the fonts, stripped the noise function, renamed "GAME_TICK" to "CRASH_GAME_TICK" but as the original author to most of the code you're running, it's rather obvious you just spent a couple days obfuscating your previous blatant copyright infringement.

It's like you got a copy of a Harry Potter book, and find-and-replaced most of the characters and places names. Pretending it's your work is insulting.

And I'm going to be honest, I personally don't really care about copyright infringement (I pretty much pirate every movie I watch), but I do very much value honesty -- and find this whole situation extremely concerning.

And on that note, I'm not sure what's a bigger red-flag: That you raised millions of dollars with an ICO to supposedly help pay development, and then would rip Dan off for a rather insignificant once-off 2 bitcoin licensing fee. Or that you'd rather tarnish your brand and reputation over said fee.

I know Daniel said he's too busy to care, but I don't think what you're doing is fair. I intend on leaving negative trust, and petitioning the Crypto Gambling Foundation to revoke your membership, unless you can do the right thing and pay what is owed (and ideally provide a proof-of-solvency to show you are in the position to complete the terms of the buy-back program that your ICO tokens require).

In my opinion you're being far too reasonable regarding this if this all is true. Simply paying the 2 BTC shouldn't cut it, lol.

[chazley]

ive been battling dean for years now, the guy is trustworthy holding people's money but beyond that is a terrible businessman, irrational, thin-skinned, and cheap. what he did ripping off the crash game and not paying daniel the 2 btc is so scummy. i tried my best to expose him at the time he did his last ICO but unfortunately he was able to effectively steal all that bitcoin from uninformed investors.

[JollyGood]

I'm quite surprised.

There was a time I had a certain amount of respect towards Dean but we're way past those times. I have no idea what reason Dean even has to be dishonest about anything like this. Especially if it all boils down to just 2 BTC.

You know we were under the opinion, wrongly, that we were able to use that code after discussing it with RHavar.

This is absolutely ridiculous of you to drag me into this.  I neither said nor implied any such thing. I would normally be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and suggest maybe you misunderstood me, but we only spoke about it after you launched with pirated software.

But I do encourage you to share anything I said that might have given you a different impression. Just make sure you include enough context, like how you first started off with "we didn't just copy it but used reference" before then later admitting you were using a minified verbatim copy of bustabit (even including some pointless bustabit debug lines) both on the client and server, and asked about known problems or exploits in the specific version you're running. So there goes the "accidental infringement" defence. Ooops.

But reviewing our conversation, my advice was to follow the terms of the AGPLv3 version (releasing modified source code) and save you paying the small licensing fee. So please don't act like you were led astray (and not to mention: I'm not a lawyer or have any rights to the source code you're using) so my opinion is rather irrelevant anyway.

There is not any Bustabit code in the relaunched version and we even use different libraries for graphing.

That's obviously nonsense. Let's not pretend you reimplemented the entire thing in a couple days. It's exactly the same and has literally exactly the same rendering quirks and bugs that it did before. I can see you made a few obvious changes (stripped the debug lines, changed <canvas> to <svg> changed the fonts, stripped the noise function, renamed "GAME_TICK" to "CRASH_GAME_TICK" but as the original author to most of the code you're running, it's rather obvious you just spent a couple days obfuscating your previous blatant copyright infringement.

It's like you got a copy of a Harry Potter book, and find-and-replaced most of the characters and places names. Pretending it's your work is insulting.

And I'm going to be honest, I personally don't really care about copyright infringement (I pretty much pirate every movie I watch), but I do very much value honesty -- and find this whole situation extremely concerning.

And on that note, I'm not sure what's a bigger red-flag: That you raised millions of dollars with an ICO to supposedly help pay development, and then would rip Dan off for a rather insignificant once-off 2 bitcoin licensing fee. Or that you'd rather tarnish your brand and reputation over said fee.

I know Daniel said he's too busy to care, but I don't think what you're doing is fair. I intend on leaving negative trust, and petitioning the Crypto Gambling Foundation to revoke your membership, unless you can do the right thing and pay what is owed (and ideally provide a proof-of-solvency to show you are in the position to complete the terms of the buy-back program that your ICO tokens require).

In my opinion you're being far too reasonable regarding this if this all is true. Simply paying the 2 BTC shouldn't cut it, lol.

That scammer Dean Nolan from betking has been exposed yet again.

All his other lies and scams were swept under the carpet by positive posts but now it is impossible for the scammer Dean Nolan to save his "reputation" or his trashy betking website.

He has avoided paying just 2 BTC for blatantly stolen software yet he claimed he gave away 25 Bitcoin to charities in December 2017 from 1st December to 25th December at 1 BTC a day as a gesture of kindness (and of-course paying for news and press releases advertising and promoting the non-existent endeavour) but never "proved" which charities he allegedly donated to yet milked all the attention.



---------------------

---------------------


---------------------

---------------------



That image is just one of many alt-accounts Dean Nolan uses for betking because of the negative Trust the scammer keeps using new alt-names from time to time

[Timetwister]

It seems like the dilution fee is 2% now instead of 1%. I think it's a good idea considering the bankroll is already big enough for the max profit that players usually target.

[JollyGood]

ive been battling dean for years now, the guy is trustworthy holding people's money but beyond that is a terrible businessman, irrational, thin-skinned, and cheap. what he did ripping off the crash game and not paying daniel the 2 btc is so scummy. i tried my best to expose him at the time he did his last ICO but unfortunately he was able to effectively steal all that bitcoin from uninformed investors.

The manner in which Dean Nolan the scammer lied in the betking ICO whitepaper to get mostly newbies and gullible investors to part with their crypto was not good. Still he was getting backed up by several members that was until of he was beginning to exposed by several of us.

Dean Nolan the scammer should have paid the 2 BTC licence fee. Now whatever was left of his reputation is in tatters. Many of us tried to warn investors about him but probably none of us thought Dean Nolan was going to scam fellow colleagues from the gaming/gambling community.

[BayAreaCoins]

I just wanted to poke my head in here and say two things.

1.  That Dean is utterly deceitful and dishonest in my opinion and experience.

2.  My website, FreeBitcoins.com, is using the source code from https://github.com/FuzzyHobbit/bustabit-gameserver/blob/master/license.txt under the license http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html.  After discussing with Deb and Dooglus (they aren't involved with FreeBitcoins, I was just blabbering with Deb and Deb was blabbering with Doog)... it seems we have to open source our stuff as well to comply with this license.  We are going to open source to adhere to the agreement.  If I'm missing anything, please let me know.  We'll do just about anything not to be a "Dean."

I haven't even made a Bitcointalk thread yet for our little gay rocket game, but I'll make sure that we open source the site before I make a thread.  (Clarification Edit: We do have a thread for investment stuff, but not like an "official thread.")

Thank you very much!

[devans]

Yeah, that's basically it. You can find a decent human-readable overview of what the AGPLv3 entails here, with the TL;DR being that in order to use the code you need to make it and your changes available under the same license. In practice the easiest way to do it is to keep your code in a public GitHub repo or something like that and link to it on your site.

I strongly recommend using the source code hosted at https://github.com/kungfuant, though. FuzzyHobbit went through the effort of obfuscating the commit history, so it's hard to tell whether any potentially malicious changes were made to the code. The kungfuant repos are also a bit more up-to-date.