BitBet Stole ~$7,000 from me (10 BTC)

[Beans]

The service is GAMBLING.  GAMBLING is risky.

Keeping my 10 BTC is STEALING. STEALING is wrong.

Sending $9,000 to a random gambling site without reading the rules is stupid.  Blaming others is childish.

Stealing is going in the night while you sleep and breaking into a safe. 

This is you gouging out your eyes and running into a casino and slapping down $9,000 on a roullete machine and then demanding your money back because you didn't know how it worked.

In your roullete comparison, he would be the guy who walked into the casino and handed the dealer $9000 dollars without reading the fine print. Then the dealer turns around and says. "Sorry, you don't get a turn the last spin was 5 mins ago. Tuff luck." If you think that's how normal business works. Your either a crook or delusional.

There are laws to protect customers from these types of scams. Businesses are not allowed to just take your money and not provide the item or service. They can write whatever they like in the rules, it doesn't change that.

There are way to many companies like this in Bitcoin. We need to stop supporting these crooked business practices if we want bitcoin to succeed.

[1713488020]

1713488020

[1713488020]

1713488020

[MPOE-PR]

There are way to many companies like this in Bitcoin. We need to stop supporting these crooked business practices if we want bitcoin to succeed.

You are roughly in the position of a Colorado bug on a potato plant discussing what "we" should be doing if "we" wish agriculture to succeed.

Shut the fuck up and get lost. You're not even part of Bitcoin in the first place. And the reason Bitcoin doth succeed has a way lot more to do with MP than you can begin to comprehend.

[MPOE-PR]

This could be solved easily I think . Their rules could include this for ex: all bets entered 30 minutes before bet outcome is known will be cancelled and refunded with a 1%.

Timing does not work in Bitcoin the way you intuitively imagine it would.

In fact the reason the blockchain even exists in the first place is that timing and synchronicity issues have no easy solution.

[deivid]

This could be solved easily I think . Their rules could include this for ex: all bets entered 30 minutes before bet outcome is known will be cancelled and refunded with a 1%.

Timing does not work in Bitcoin the way you intuitively imagine it would.

In fact the reason the blockchain even exists in the first place is that timing and synchronicity issues have no easy solution.

I'm not referring to bitcoin or blockchain timing. I talk about bet closed time in bitbet.us. If they just reject those last 30 minute (even confirmed) bets, I think this will keep away cheater's bets and scammers.
I'm sure there's solutions. But seems like they like the actual betting system.

[MPOE-PR]

I'm not referring to bitcoin or blockchain timing. I talk about bet closed time in bitbet.us. If they just reject those last 30 minute (even confirmed) bets, I think this will keep away cheater's bets and scammers.

So if BitBet clock shows 10:45, what time is it on arbitrary bet #6705's clock?

I'm sure there's solutions. But seems like they like the actual betting system.

The problem with the world is that the clueless are always sure of various things.

[MoneyMorpheus]

This could be solved easily I think . Their rules could include this for ex: all bets entered 30 minutes before bet outcome is known will be cancelled and refunded with a 1%.

Timing does not work in Bitcoin the way you intuitively imagine it would.

In fact the reason the blockchain even exists in the first place is that timing and synchronicity issues have no easy solution.

You are saying that if the user sent the money without fees there is no way to verify that he sent it at a particular time? If that is so you should have started with that.

I understand your theory in double spending, but if the user sent his BTC from another betting service which he doesn't own, he doesn't control the private keys of that wallet and there is no way he can double spend those coins, or am I missing something here?

Your arguments in this post are usually so emotional that is hard to figure out what you are trying to say. I would suggest you keep your answers in a polite and logical manner. If you actually have a point it will be heard this way. But so far I'm still thinking that the user has a stronger point and its going to take some good reasons for changing my mind.

Would it make it more risky to return all the transactions that had no fee instead of keeping them?

If the user actually double spend his bet after the resolution of the bet is known, wouldn't that bet be qualified as late?

Given your attitude I feel like I'm missing something and it would be much easier if you enlighten us with that.

[sangaman]

If they didn't receive your money until after betting was closed, then you didn't purchase anything. Whatever is written in the rules can't take away your consumer rights. If they don't provide the service paid for or send a refund it's just theft. There not protecting anyone by keeping the money, just lining there pockets.

The service is GAMBLING.  GAMBLING is risky.  When bets are time average weighted you must discourage late bets.  Why?

Masses of idiots like you would spam the blockchain at the last possible second when the bet outcome is known, for even a 1% winnings.  This screws early bettors and creates 95% of the work for bitbet admins for 5% of the customers.  The same 5% of childish people that bitbet is discouraging, because they are the worst kind of customers.   

This OPEN discouragement of late betting is clearly explained as such, in the faq. 

You're telling me you went and sent 10btc, at the time, ~$8,000, without even reading the faq? And you're blaming others for this oversight?

Gambling is risky but the risk is supposed to be in losing the bets and not getting screwed by the site operator. Having a rule that payments must be confirmed before a bet is resolved to count is perfectly reasonable. Having a rule that refunds of such payments are subject to a small convenience fee (since it may require manual intervention to refund) is also perfectly reasonable. Having a rule that says bets don't count up to X minutes before a bet is resolved is also reasonable.

A price of almost $750 is not $750 though, so unless the bet was placed after the price actually crossed $750 then I don't think it's an exploit - the outcome was still in doubt even if the doubt was very small. Regardless, keeping 100% of the money is stealing, and a wave of people from BitBet IRC chat saying otherwise doesn't change that.

A FAQ is for when people have questions, it's not a must-read for casual users who want to make sure they don't get screwed by awful policies. Even actual must-reads like terms and conditions you must agree to before using a service do not give you the right to steal.

OP, I hope you contact a lawyer if the site continues to refuse to refund you. I bet a judge would see this as stealing, but running this by a lawyer would be the best way to be sure. You're out a significant chunk of change so I believe it could easily be worth it, and you'd be doing the bitcoin community a service.

[deivid]

So if BitBet clock shows 10:45, what time is it on arbitrary bet #6705's clock?

If bitbet says: bet closed at 10:45 (bitbet time) , then all bets confirmed and received from 10:15 (bitbet time) to ahead would be cancelled and refunded. What's the problem with that?

[deivid]

If they didn't receive your money until after betting was closed, then you didn't purchase anything. Whatever is written in the rules can't take away your consumer rights. If they don't provide the service paid for or send a refund it's just theft. There not protecting anyone by keeping the money, just lining there pockets.

The service is GAMBLING.  GAMBLING is risky.  When bets are time average weighted you must discourage late bets.  Why?

Masses of idiots like you would spam the blockchain at the last possible second when the bet outcome is known, for even a 1% winnings.  This screws early bettors and creates 95% of the work for bitbet admins for 5% of the customers.  The same 5% of childish people that bitbet is discouraging, because they are the worst kind of customers.   

This OPEN discouragement of late betting is clearly explained as such, in the faq. 

You're telling me you went and sent 10btc, at the time, ~$8,000, without even reading the faq? And you're blaming others for this oversight?

Gambling is risky but the risk is supposed to be in losing the bets and not getting screwed by the site operator. Having a rule that payments must be confirmed before a bet is resolved to count is perfectly reasonable. Having a rule that refunds of such payments are subject to a small convenience fee (since it may require manual intervention to refund) is also perfectly reasonable. Having a rule that says bets don't count up to X minutes before a bet is resolved is also reasonable.

A price of almost $750 is not $750 though, so unless the bet was placed after the price actually crossed $750 then I don't think it's an exploit - the outcome was still in doubt even if the doubt was very small. Regardless, keeping 100% of the money is stealing, and a wave of people from BitBet IRC chat saying otherwise doesn't change that.

A FAQ is for when people have questions, it's not a must-read for casual users who want to make sure they don't get screwed by awful policies. Even actual must-reads like terms and conditions you must agree to before using a service do not give you the right to steal.

OP, I hope you contact a lawyer if the site continues to refuse to refund you. I bet a judge would see this as stealing, but running this by a lawyer would be the best way to be sure. You're out a significant chunk of change so I believe it could easily be worth it, and you'd be doing the bitcoin community a service.

+1.

I encourage bitbet to resolve this issue. If not, maybe they will end paying x10 times what they have took.

[snackman]

Please upvote this on reddit to alert the wider community:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1r3spb/how_is_this_not_considered_theft_by_bitbet_and_is/

[Bugpowder]

Don't expect BitBet to change a policy that supplies a sizable proportion of the S.BBET dividends.  Maybe you could purchase the rest of the S.BBET shares on the market in order to get a partial refund?

[420]

did user as betsofbitco.in for help? they're the ones with the messed up transaction; is that their policy?

[snackman]

Don't expect BitBet to change a policy that supplies a sizable proportion of the S.BBET dividends.

How many of the #bitcoin-assets chatters are here because they own shares in BitBet and my complaint threatens their dividends?

Bugpowder is yet another #bitcoin-assets guy.
----------------------------------------

What are they going to do, launch a fedora attack?

Hopefully, they will spread the word that BitBet is a scam site run by thieves.
----------------------------------------

There are way to many companies like this in Bitcoin. We need to stop supporting these crooked business practices if we want bitcoin to succeed.

You are roughly in the position of a Colorado bug on a potato plant discussing what "we" should be doing if "we" wish agriculture to succeed.

Shut the fuck up and get lost. You're not even part of Bitcoin in the first place. And the reason Bitcoin doth succeed has a way lot more to do with MP than you can begin to comprehend.

Bitcoin is a distributed system - one which Beans is a part of simply by posting in this forum. Its success does not depend on any one person - that's the point!
----------------------------------------

Keeping my 10 BTC is STEALING. STEALING is wrong.

"Would you download a car?"

My opinions on intellectual property law are an unrelated issue, which I'd be happy to discuss in a different thread.
----------------------------------------

Gambling is risky but the risk is supposed to be in losing the bets and not getting screwed by the site operator. Having a rule that payments must be confirmed before a bet is resolved to count is perfectly reasonable. Having a rule that refunds of such payments are subject to a small convenience fee (since it may require manual intervention to refund) is also perfectly reasonable. Having a rule that says bets don't count up to X minutes before a bet is resolved is also reasonable.

A price of almost $750 is not $750 though, so unless the bet was placed after the price actually crossed $750 then I don't think it's an exploit - the outcome was still in doubt even if the doubt was very small. Regardless, keeping 100% of the money is stealing, and a wave of people from BitBet IRC chat saying otherwise doesn't change that.

A FAQ is for when people have questions, it's not a must-read for casual users who want to make sure they don't get screwed by awful policies. Even actual must-reads like terms and conditions you must agree to before using a service do not give you the right to steal.

OP, I hope you contact a lawyer if the site continues to refuse to refund you. I bet a judge would see this as stealing, but running this by a lawyer would be the best way to be sure. You're out a significant chunk of change so I believe it could easily be worth it, and you'd be doing the bitcoin community a service.

+1.

I encourage bitbet to resolve this issue. If not, maybe they will end paying x10 times what they have took.

I contacted a lawyer that accepts bitcoin . I'll keep you updated.

[snackman]

did user as betsofbitco.in for help? they're the ones with the messed up transaction; is that their policy?

Yes, I've been emailing coinjedi and I'm currently waiting on his response to my latest:

[MoneyMorpheus]

Hopefully, they will spread the word that BitBet is a scam site run by thieves.

Which is false, but I understand guess blackmail is OK with you.
What you should know is that you're far from the first wanting to do that. What do you think would happen if any company catered towards any of those requests?

You do realize no one was able to provide a valid argument which makes bitbet's policy a legit reason for keeping those btc, right? So far in the whole post every time it was questioned all the answers where insults. I hope you can clarify from a technical point of view why this is valid.

[deadweasel]

I'll take the case!

[SgtSpike]

You do realize that not agreeing with someone's policy is not enough to build a court case?
The policy is there, if you don't agree don't use the site. But if you call it "theft", you're a scammer.

I don't think you understand how policies work in court.  A court would never uphold a policy that states "I have the right to steal your money," which is effectivly what bitbet's policy says.

So the correct course of action for you is :
 - Think,
 - Understand the why of the policy,
 - Get over it,
 - Pay more attention next time

Well, I USED to have respect for you, davout.  Are you involved in this site in any way?

[MoneyMorpheus]

I don't think you understand how policies work in court.

And you do, I wager? You must have an Internet Lawyer Diploma! No shortage of them, unlike bitcoins.

A court would never uphold a policy that states "I have the right to steal your money," which is effectivly what bitbet's policy says.

But it's not what it says. And given that you can perfectly not agree with it by not playing, you're simply not understanding the issue.

OP wanted to bet at the very last minute and steal from legitimate bettors.
OP did not understand how the bitcoin network worked and didn't even use a proper wallet.
He's the thief; he's just upset because he's a bad one, and is now moving into blackmail. Beware which side you take.

Can you explain how he is a thief? Most of us don't understand that part

[deadweasel]

You do realize that not agreeing with someone's policy is not enough to build a court case?
The policy is there, if you don't agree don't use the site. But if you call it "theft", you're a scammer.

I don't think you understand how policies work in court.  A court would never uphold a policy that states "I have the right to steal your money," which is effectivly what bitbet's policy says.

So the correct course of action for you is :
 - Think,
 - Understand the why of the policy,
 - Get over it,
 - Pay more attention next time

Well, I USED to have respect for you, davout.  Are you involved in this site in any way?

Look, it's a hardline stance, but they can discourage late betting this way because it's clearly stated on the website and it's a private business that's not forcing you to use it.  You have the options to use it or not.  If you use it poorly, fuck you.

Snackman got his service provided, because he got the thrill of sending BTC in late, and lost.  Now he has the thrill of putting responsibility elsewhere.  Service fucking rendered.

Had he read the FAQ, which anyone with a brain in their head would do before sending $9.000, he would know that sending bets in late is still GAMBLING with your money.  So, the service was in fact rendered. 

Late betting scammers think you can scrape off the winnings of legit users?   Nope.

[MoneyMorpheus]

You do realize that not agreeing with someone's policy is not enough to build a court case?
The policy is there, if you don't agree don't use the site. But if you call it "theft", you're a scammer.

I don't think you understand how policies work in court.  A court would never uphold a policy that states "I have the right to steal your money," which is effectivly what bitbet's policy says.

So the correct course of action for you is :
 - Think,
 - Understand the why of the policy,
 - Get over it,
 - Pay more attention next time

Well, I USED to have respect for you, davout.  Are you involved in this site in any way?

Look, it's a hardline stance, but they can discourage late betting this way because it's clearly stated on the website and it's a private business that's not forcing you to use it.  You have the options to use it or not.  If you use it poorly, fuck you.

Snackman got his service provided, because he got the thrill of sending BTC in late, and lost.  Now he has the thrill of putting responsibility elsewhere.  Service fucking rendered.

Had he read the FAQ, which anyone with a brain in their head would do before sending $9.000, he would know that sending bets in late is still GAMBLING with your money.  So, the service was in fact rendered. 

Late betting scammers think you can scrape off the winnings of legit users?   Nope.

A bet can either be accepted or rejected, how is it a legit action to accept and reject it at the same time?