BETKING: 500 BTC, 2250 ETH & 425 LTC Bankroll Lies

[JollyGood]

Who else is chasing freebie useless and worthless bounty EOS tokens for the fast dying betking scam website?

Scammer Dean Nolan used Bitointalk forums to promote his scam 2017 ICO and 2018 Christmas Wager scam

Now he is saying negative things about Bitcointalk Forum even though it was the very thing that allowed his scams to succeed.

Oh the irony when scammer Dean Nolan wrote Bitcointalk Forum was for old site owners who need to keep feeling important with the small "fame" they had

[1714800838]

1714800838

[1714800838]

1714800838

[1714800838]

1714800838

[JollyGood]

It is hilarious to see betking transform from being a gaming website to becoming a chat room for gossip mongers

Leeches hanging around scammer Dean Nolan are doing what they can looking for scraps of free yet useless and worthless EOS BKT tokens  

The once popular website has fallen in to the gutter because of pathetic mismanagement by its owner/operator Dean Nolan - driven by GREED

The demise of betking is justice being served because the $6.5 million ICO funds from 2017 were not spent as promised

[JollyGood]

https://betking.io/whitepaper.pdf

This what the new whitepaper states:

Games
We offer fast, off-chain betting on classic dice, roulette, blackjack and other popular casino games.

and

Roadmap
27/01/2019 - First draft ICO published
14/02/2019 - EOS blockchain snapshot
17/02/2019 - New BetKing platform launched
18/02/2019 - BKT Airdrop
March 2019 – More games launched


The only constant are the lies and misinformation by scammer Dean Nolan. There is no "we". He keeps implying there is a team when he is nothing but a one man band who hires low-cost remote freelancers to tweak changes for a few $ per hour rate.

Pathetic. Apart from a dice game UI that looks like it is 15 years old there is nothing to play. There is no development just the same old look of the betking website pre-ICO, post-ICO and present. The latest whitepaper states "We offer fast, off-chain betting on classic dice, roulette, blackjack and other popular casino games" but that is another out-and-out lie


 

[JollyGood]

It seems clear the bounty seeking users are still not out in force seeking EOS freebie useless and worthless BKT tokens. By now they should have been lining up to attack anybody exposing scammer Dean Nolan and betking but there are a few that are remaining loyal to their paymaster scammer Dean Nolan, nobody else cares about betking anymore.

If you have any information that could be used by the UK Police (Scotland Sheriff) which might be used in a criminal case against scammer Dean Nolan then please contact me. I will not reveal your name and only use the information for my case file if it seems it could be used by the UK Police.

[BillyBurns]

attack? You mute anybody instantly if they disagree with you. You still not have answered why you gave me bad trust rating.
Here is the ATTACK that is completely false.
-------------------------------
BillyBurns   2019-03-15   0.00000000   Reference   This account is used to promote scammer Dean Nolan and the scam betking website.
It is also used to attack anybody that exposes or challenges scammer Dean Nolan and his betking scam all for the bounty betking gives to these fools
-----------------------------------


I don't attack anybody, if being calm and logical and pointing out where you state opinions as facts is a attack I don't know what to say man. If someone were to look at your last couple hundred post's they might see who is attacking who. For the record I have NEVER accepted a bounty or been paid anything from Betking other than my profit from investment in housebankroll. I don't appreciate you abusing the Trust/merit system, if you look at your trust system we can see that you have given almost a hundred people a bad rating in a short time. Abuse of the system can be harmful to the community. I have expressed my concern to the moderators several times. I can only hope others will see your abuse and express their concerns.

[JollyGood]

Which is the self moderated BetKing ICO thread as promised here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2150057.msg45274187#msg45274187 ?

This is the thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5023833.0

Scammer Dean Nolan locked that thread too because LoyceV was about to post that he just discovered his $700 worth of BKB tokens were now worth just $8 thanks to scammer Dean Nolan destroying betking.

It did not stop him posting it elsewhere anyway: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4873939.msg50159244#msg50159244

We will hopefully see a much deserved Scam thread in the forums about that from LoyceV very soon  

[BillyBurns]

Can you address my post's above I don't appreciate no reply when you give me bad trust.

[JollyGood]

I forgot to add that LoyceV like others does not appreciate the quarterly BKB buy-backs being cancelled.

Promising one thing in the ICO whitepaper then doing something else... it just might be a criminal offence 

Promising to use 50% of the funds for the bankroll and then not doing it THUS affecting the whole structure of the post-ICO re-launch affected everything. Well, that might be enough to prove negligence on part of scammer Dean Nolan. I am sure the UK Police (Scotland Sheriff) will appreciate any solid information that is passed on to them in the case file

 

[BillyBurns]

I forgot to add that LoyceV like others does not appreciate the quarterly BKB buy-backs being cancelled.

Promising one thing in the ICO whitepaper then doing something else... it just might be a criminal offence 

Promising to use 50% of the funds for the bankroll and then not doing it THUS affecting the whole structure of the post-ICO re-launch affected everything. Well, that might be enough to prove negligence on part of scammer Dean Nolan. I am sure the UK Police (Scotland Sheriff) will appreciate any solid information that is passed on to them in the case file

 

Please stop ignoring my posts and explain why I was given a negative reputation in trust system by you. I do not appreciate that especially without a reason why.

[JollyGood]

Amount raised:

BTC - 1,046 BTC
ETH - 4619 ETH
LTC - 856 LTC  

According to the whitepaper at least the following should have been set aside for the bankroll because it was 50%:

500 BTC
2250 ETH
425 LTC

These are some of the reasons why many people in the forum call betking and Dean Nolan scam and scammer.

Beware of betking, please avoid that scam.

[RHavar]

I don't appreciate you abusing the Trust/merit system, if you look at your trust system we can see that you have given almost a hundred people a bad rating in a short time. Abuse of the system can be harmful to the community. I have expressed my concern to the moderators several times. I can only hope others will see your abuse and express their concerns.

I don't think you can really abuse the trust system. It's basically a glorified comment section. No one really looks at it, or pays attention -- I wouldn't worry about it. (Although I agree about the multiple threads, it's a bit annoying).

That said, I find your support of betking a bit perplexing. I looked through your post history, and you're clearly a reasonable person. You've been aggressively promoting beking for 3(?) years (with even your profile link to "betking.io"), but your only affiliation you say is that you're an investor?  So did you invest in the ICO? And if so, did you get the same treatment as other investors?

Because honestly, I don't think a single reasonable person can conclude it was fair. Doing my best to not sensationalize:

The ostensible purpose of the ICO was to raise funds for bankroll and site development/software. Despite raising several million, the bankroll remains paltry and does (or did?) even require additional bankroll investors. And for software costs, Dean has been remarkably frugal. Even going as far as ripping Daniel off for 2 btc to save on costs (even despite knowing it would greatly harm his reputation, which is what casinos live and die on)

Dean personally profited by the terms of the ICO when the price of bitcoin went up (by pegging the token to USD, while holding btc). I agreed it was fair, because under the same terms Dean would personally lose if the price of bitcoin went down. When I inquired about how that is possible, and at what price bitcoin would need to drop to make that untenable, he said "even at $1" he could do it, because he has system in place to automatically sell bitcoin and would always honor the buy backs.

If you have the time, I'd appreciate some insight on how you think this is not just outright scamming?

--

On a more subjective note, I re-read through my conversations with Dean and am 99% sure that Dean tried to use his reputation (just before canceling the buybacks) to scam me out of a ~million dollars. He made up some story about having fiat denominated debts (poker debts, he told me), and having bitcoin. And needed a loan. Right from the very start, I told him I am happy to do so but I have a hard-requirement of not exposing myself to counterparty risk (e.g. i'd want him to escrow some bitcoin as collateral). Each time he would come up with new terms they would not meet the requirements and leave me vulnerable to being scammed. Then he finally agreed to preliminary terms, I went to the trouble of securing some highly respected and well-known people who could escrow. And then he changed his mind and wanted to self-escrow. Or then he agreed to collateral conditions, but wanted to use BKB (and once again promised that buy-back would never stop). Also all the while he was offering insane interest rates.  There's no way this was done in good faith.

But I do agree that my accusation is "he tried to scam" is extremely weak, so I'd rather if you could (since Dean refuses to give a proper response) to how you think what he did do to ICO investors was anything but scamming.

[BillyBurns]

Take a look at this guys trust system, and his other post's in other threads. He states opinions as facts, blocks anybody who disagrees with him. He also gave me a bad trust rating for a false reason. When I asked him to explain it he refused. I have integrity cryptogames once sent me 116 extra etherium when I cashed out I notified them of the error before they even knew about it and sent it back to them, they gladly gifted me 12 etherium for the deed and I was ecstatic about it. Does this sound like a scammer to you? I have integrity and I don't appreciate this guy abusing the trust system. I have messaged mods about it but they seem to not respond or do anything about the guys blatant disregard for the truth. Be wary of what this guy has to say, and if you got the time go through his post history to see what I'm talking about. Jollygood please tell me how I am a scammer?

[BillyBurns]

I don't appreciate you abusing the Trust/merit system, if you look at your trust system we can see that you have given almost a hundred people a bad rating in a short time. Abuse of the system can be harmful to the community. I have expressed my concern to the moderators several times. I can only hope others will see your abuse and express their concerns.

I don't think you can really abuse the trust system. It's basically a glorified comment section. No one really looks at it, or pays attention -- I wouldn't worry about it. (Although I agree about the multiple threads, it's a bit annoying).

That said, I find your support of betking a bit perplexing. I looked through your post history, and you're clearly a reasonable person. You've been aggressively promoting beking for 3(?) years (with even your profile link to "betking.io"), but your only affiliation you say is that you're an investor?  So did you invest in the ICO? And if so, did you get the same treatment as other investors?

Because honestly, I don't think a single reasonable person can conclude it was fair. Doing my best to not sensationalize:

The ostensible purpose of the ICO was to raise funds for bankroll and site development/software. Despite raising several million, the bankroll remains paltry and does (or did?) even require additional bankroll investors. And for software costs, Dean has been remarkably frugal. Even going as far as ripping Daniel off for 2 btc to save on costs (even despite knowing it would greatly harm his reputation, which is what casinos live and die on)

Dean personally profited by the terms of the ICO when the price of bitcoin went up (by pegging the token to USD, while holding btc). I agreed it was fair, because under the same terms Dean would personally lose if the price of bitcoin went down. When I inquired about how that is possible, and at what price bitcoin would need to drop to make that untenable, he said "even at $1" he could do it, because he has system in place to automatically sell bitcoin and would always honor the buy backs.

If you have the time, I'd appreciate some insight on how you think this is not just outright scamming?

--

On a more subjective note, I re-read through my conversations with Dean and am 99% sure that Dean tried to use his reputation (just before canceling the buybacks) to scam me out of a ~million dollars. He made up some story about having fiat denominated debts (poker debts, he told me), and having bitcoin. And needed a loan. Right from the very start, I told him I am happy to do so but I have a hard-requirement of not exposing myself to counterparty risk (e.g. i'd want him to escrow some bitcoin as collateral). Each time he would come up with new terms they would not meet the requirements and leave me vulnerable to being scammed. Then he finally agreed to preliminary terms, I went to the trouble of securing some highly respected and well-known people who could escrow. And then he changed his mind and wanted to self-escrow. Or then he agreed to collateral conditions, but wanted to use BKB (and once again promised that buy-back would never stop). Also all the while he was offering insane interest rates.  There's no way this was done in good faith.

But I do agree that my accusation is "he tried to scam" is extremely weak, so I'd rather if you could (since Dean refuses to give a proper response) to how you think what he did do to ICO investors was anything but scamming.

I don't appreciate you abusing the Trust/merit system, if you look at your trust system we can see that you have given almost a hundred people a bad rating in a short time. Abuse of the system can be harmful to the community. I have expressed my concern to the moderators several times. I can only hope others will see your abuse and express their concerns.

I don't think you can really abuse the trust system. It's basically a glorified comment section. No one really looks at it, or pays attention -- I wouldn't worry about it. (Although I agree about the multiple threads, it's a bit annoying).

That said, I find your support of betking a bit perplexing. I looked through your post history, and you're clearly a reasonable person. You've been aggressively promoting beking for 3(?) years (with even your profile link to "betking.io"), but your only affiliation you say is that you're an investor?  So did you invest in the ICO? And if so, did you get the same treatment as other investors?

Because honestly, I don't think a single reasonable person can conclude it was fair. Doing my best to not sensationalize:

The ostensible purpose of the ICO was to raise funds for bankroll and site development/software. Despite raising several million, the bankroll remains paltry and does (or did?) even require additional bankroll investors. And for software costs, Dean has been remarkably frugal. Even going as far as ripping Daniel off for 2 btc to save on costs (even despite knowing it would greatly harm his reputation, which is what casinos live and die on)

Dean personally profited by the terms of the ICO when the price of bitcoin went up (by pegging the token to USD, while holding btc). I agreed it was fair, because under the same terms Dean would personally lose if the price of bitcoin went down. When I inquired about how that is possible, and at what price bitcoin would need to drop to make that untenable, he said "even at $1" he could do it, because he has system in place to automatically sell bitcoin and would always honor the buy backs.

If you have the time, I'd appreciate some insight on how you think this is not just outright scamming?

--

On a more subjective note, I re-read through my conversations with Dean and am 99% sure that Dean tried to use his reputation (just before canceling the buybacks) to scam me out of a ~million dollars. He made up some story about having fiat denominated debts (poker debts, he told me), and having bitcoin. And needed a loan. Right from the very start, I told him I am happy to do so but I have a hard-requirement of not exposing myself to counterparty risk (e.g. i'd want him to escrow some bitcoin as collateral). Each time he would come up with new terms they would not meet the requirements and leave me vulnerable to being scammed. Then he finally agreed to preliminary terms, I went to the trouble of securing some highly respected and well-known people who could escrow. And then he changed his mind and wanted to self-escrow. Or then he agreed to collateral conditions, but wanted to use BKB (and once again promised that buy-back would never stop). Also all the while he was offering insane interest rates.  There's no way this was done in good faith.

But I do agree that my accusation is "he tried to scam" is extremely weak, so I'd rather if you could (since Dean refuses to give a proper response) to how you think what he did do to ICO investors was anything but scamming.

  This is where a interesting conversation starts. I was a ico investor and I have received no special treatment. My 1st reaction was anger. As for Dean being frugal you must have not been around when he was doing daily tournaments and freerolls with overlay day after day in poker tournaments. Also is reported that pro gamblers were crushing the sportsbook due to the favorable odds. According to what I have heard is that Dean was buying back tokens from people who were unhappy with the ico (did not know this was occurring). So some investors were able to exit without a loss and even a profit from BKB investment on site.

   Is renegging on a promise a scam? That is a question that I think each person can define differently. Now if intent was good but methodology was bad is it a outright scam?  Do you think Dean intent was for this to occur? Do you think Bitconnect had good intentions? Are they both outright scams? What if that system in place failed and it was impossible to fulfill?  Mistakes were made to get to this point there is no denying that, but to get where those mistakes began, plenty of sound decisions were made beforehand and many previous investors ( many ico investors) made out a lot of bitcoin. This obviously doesn't justify it because yes some of us got screwed (hopefully short-mediumterm)  this happens all the time in the stock market.  How are you so sure you were not going to be repaid had the loan gone through? Do you think there will be a exit scam? Is he fudging with the numbers on site or effecting rolls? Is he able to secure site funds? From what I have seen lately is Dean working on site day in and day out trying to get this going in the right direction again, hopefully he has a fire under his ass and can try and make good on those failed promises.

Ps Rhavar can you get someone to lock most of these threads but the main BK and leave Jolly one of these threads rather than him pumping all 5 several times throughout the day. I have emailed plenty of mods they don't care what I think.

[JollyGood]

I don't appreciate you abusing the Trust/merit system, if you look at your trust system we can see that you have given almost a hundred people a bad rating in a short time. Abuse of the system can be harmful to the community. I have expressed my concern to the moderators several times. I can only hope others will see your abuse and express their concerns.

I don't think you can really abuse the trust system. It's basically a glorified comment section. No one really looks at it, or pays attention -- I wouldn't worry about it. (Although I agree about the multiple threads, it's a bit annoying).

That said, I find your support of betking a bit perplexing. I looked through your post history, and you're clearly a reasonable person. You've been aggressively promoting beking for 3(?) years (with even your profile link to "betking.io"), but your only affiliation you say is that you're an investor?  So did you invest in the ICO? And if so, did you get the same treatment as other investors?

Because honestly, I don't think a single reasonable person can conclude it was fair. Doing my best to not sensationalize:

The ostensible purpose of the ICO was to raise funds for bankroll and site development/software. Despite raising several million, the bankroll remains paltry and does (or did?) even require additional bankroll investors. And for software costs, Dean has been remarkably frugal. Even going as far as ripping Daniel off for 2 btc to save on costs (even despite knowing it would greatly harm his reputation, which is what casinos live and die on)

Dean personally profited by the terms of the ICO when the price of bitcoin went up (by pegging the token to USD, while holding btc). I agreed it was fair, because under the same terms Dean would personally lose if the price of bitcoin went down. When I inquired about how that is possible, and at what price bitcoin would need to drop to make that untenable, he said "even at $1" he could do it, because he has system in place to automatically sell bitcoin and would always honor the buy backs.

If you have the time, I'd appreciate some insight on how you think this is not just outright scamming?

--

On a more subjective note, I re-read through my conversations with Dean and am 99% sure that Dean tried to use his reputation (just before canceling the buybacks) to scam me out of a ~million dollars. He made up some story about having fiat denominated debts (poker debts, he told me), and having bitcoin. And needed a loan. Right from the very start, I told him I am happy to do so but I have a hard-requirement of not exposing myself to counterparty risk (e.g. i'd want him to escrow some bitcoin as collateral). Each time he would come up with new terms they would not meet the requirements and leave me vulnerable to being scammed. Then he finally agreed to preliminary terms, I went to the trouble of securing some highly respected and well-known people who could escrow. And then he changed his mind and wanted to self-escrow. Or then he agreed to collateral conditions, but wanted to use BKB (and once again promised that buy-back would never stop). Also all the while he was offering insane interest rates.  There's no way this was done in good faith.

But I do agree that my accusation is "he tried to scam" is extremely weak, so I'd rather if you could (since Dean refuses to give a proper response) to how you think what he did do to ICO investors was anything but scamming.

What an excellent post from RHavar. I had to UNIGNORE that user just to read his reply to you, I wanted to see what he would come back with.

Within minutes of my making a post he posts after me but after nearly 90 minutes of your post he finally replied with what is written below but he made no mention that scammer Dean Nolan tried to dupe you out a whopping $1 million. I think he consulted with scammer Dean Nolan before posting since he has admin rights on the betking scam website.

- He made no mention of whether 500 BTC, 2250 ETH & 425 LTC are in the bankroll or not

- He made no mention of the 20 BTC +EV that winners not paid in the 2018 Christmas Wager

- He made no mention of the BKB tokens from the 100 million that were supposed to provide for new games and a new website but did neither

- He made no mention of specifics but generalised claiming scammer Dean Nolan was not perfect and was working hard to right some wrongs 


Oh well, almost exactly what I expected from him so he is back on IGNORE again.....

  This is where a interesting conversation starts. I was a ico investor and I have received no special treatment. My 1st reaction was anger. As for Dean being frugal you must have not been around when he was doing daily tournaments and freerolls with overlay day after day in poker tournaments. Also is reported that pro gamblers were crushing the sportsbook due to the favorable odds. According to what I have heard is that Dean was buying back tokens from people who were unhappy with the ico (did not know this was occurring). So some investors were able to exit without a loss and even a profit from BKB investment on site.

   Is renegging on a promise a scam? That is a question that I think each person can define differently. Now if intent was good but methodology was bad is it a outright scam?  Do you think Dean intent was for this to occur? Do you think Bitconnect had good intentions? Are they both outright scams? What if that system in place failed and it was impossible to fulfill?  Mistakes were made to get to this point there is no denying that, but to get where those mistakes began, plenty of sound decisions were made beforehand and many previous investors ( many ico investors) made out a lot of bitcoin. This obviously doesn't justify it because yes some of us got screwed (hopefully short-mediumterm)  this happens all the time in the stock market.  How are you so sure you were not going to be repaid had the loan gone through? Do you think there will be a exit scam? Is he fudging with the numbers on site or effecting rolls? Is he able to secure site funds? From what I have seen lately is Dean working on site day in and day out trying to get this going in the right direction again, hopefully he has a fire under his ass and can try and make good on those failed promises.

[BillyBurns]

I don't appreciate you abusing the Trust/merit system, if you look at your trust system we can see that you have given almost a hundred people a bad rating in a short time. Abuse of the system can be harmful to the community. I have expressed my concern to the moderators several times. I can only hope others will see your abuse and express their concerns.

I don't think you can really abuse the trust system. It's basically a glorified comment section. No one really looks at it, or pays attention -- I wouldn't worry about it. (Although I agree about the multiple threads, it's a bit annoying).

That said, I find your support of betking a bit perplexing. I looked through your post history, and you're clearly a reasonable person. You've been aggressively promoting beking for 3(?) years (with even your profile link to "betking.io"), but your only affiliation you say is that you're an investor?  So did you invest in the ICO? And if so, did you get the same treatment as other investors?

Because honestly, I don't think a single reasonable person can conclude it was fair. Doing my best to not sensationalize:

The ostensible purpose of the ICO was to raise funds for bankroll and site development/software. Despite raising several million, the bankroll remains paltry and does (or did?) even require additional bankroll investors. And for software costs, Dean has been remarkably frugal. Even going as far as ripping Daniel off for 2 btc to save on costs (even despite knowing it would greatly harm his reputation, which is what casinos live and die on)


Dean personally profited by the terms of the ICO when the price of bitcoin went up (by pegging the token to USD, while holding btc). I agreed it was fair, because under the same terms Dean would personally lose if the price of bitcoin went down. When I inquired about how that is possible, and at what price bitcoin would need to drop to make that untenable, he said "even at $1" he could do it, because he has system in place to automatically sell bitcoin and would always honor the buy backs.

If you have the time, I'd appreciate some insight on how you think this is not just outright scamming?

--

On a more subjective note, I re-read through my conversations with Dean and am 99% sure that Dean tried to use his reputation (just before canceling the buybacks) to scam me out of a ~million dollars. He made up some story about having fiat denominated debts (poker debts, he told me), and having bitcoin. And needed a loan. Right from the very start, I told him I am happy to do so but I have a hard-requirement of not exposing myself to counterparty risk (e.g. i'd want him to escrow some bitcoin as collateral). Each time he would come up with new terms they would not meet the requirements and leave me vulnerable to being scammed. Then he finally agreed to preliminary terms, I went to the trouble of securing some highly respected and well-known people who could escrow. And then he changed his mind and wanted to self-escrow. Or then he agreed to collateral conditions, but wanted to use BKB (and once again promised that buy-back would never stop). Also all the while he was offering insane interest rates.  There's no way this was done in good faith.

But I do agree that my accusation is "he tried to scam" is extremely weak, so I'd rather if you could (since Dean refuses to give a proper response) to how you think what he did do to ICO investors was anything but scamming.

What an excellent post from RHavar. I had to UNIGNORE that user just to read his reply to you, I wanted to see what he would come back with.

Within minutes of my making a post he posts after me but after nearly 90 minutes of your post he finally replied with what is written below but he made no mention that scammer Dean Nolan tried to dupe you out a whopping $1 million. I think he consulted with scammer Dean Nolan before posting since he has admin rights on the betking scam website.

- He made no mention of whether 500 BTC, 2250 ETH & 425 LTC are in the bankroll or not

- He made no mention of the 20 BTC +EV that winners not paid in the 2018 Christmas Wager

- He made no mention of the BKB tokens from the 100 million that were supposed to provide for new games and a new website but did neither

- He made no mention of specifics but generalised claiming scammer Dean Nolan was not perfect and was working hard to right some wrongs


Oh well, almost exactly what I expected from him so he is back on IGNORE again.....

  This is where a interesting conversation starts. I was a ico investor and I have received no special treatment. My 1st reaction was anger. As for Dean being frugal you must have not been around when he was doing daily tournaments and freerolls with overlay day after day in poker tournaments. Also is reported that pro gamblers were crushing the sportsbook due to the favorable odds. According to what I have heard is that Dean was buying back tokens from people who were unhappy with the ico (did not know this was occurring). So some investors were able to exit without a loss and even a profit from BKB investment on site.

   Is renegging on a promise a scam? That is a question that I think each person can define differently. Now if intent was good but methodology was bad is it a outright scam?  Do you think Dean intent was for this to occur? Do you think Bitconnect had good intentions? Are they both outright scams? What if that system in place failed and it was impossible to fulfill?  Mistakes were made to get to this point there is no denying that, but to get where those mistakes began, plenty of sound decisions were made beforehand and many previous investors ( many ico investors) made out a lot of bitcoin. This obviously doesn't justify it because yes some of us got screwed (hopefully short-mediumterm)  this happens all the time in the stock market.  How are you so sure you were not going to be repaid had the loan gone through? Do you think there will be a exit scam? Is he fudging with the numbers on site or effecting rolls? Is he able to secure site funds? From what I have seen lately is Dean working on site day in and day out trying to get this going in the right direction again, hopefully he has a fire under his ass and can try and make good on those failed promises.

Waste of my time replying to you when you don't even read what I write but I will do it anyway.
1# Dean is sleeping
2# The only form I talk to him is on site, and we have no private message feature currently and your always sending screenshots of conversations on site so yet again another lie and false claim by you again, and yet you claim I'm the one attacking you......
#3 I did mention the speculation Rhavar had of being dupped but it is clearly speculation and we will never know, but I assume you will still speak of it like it's factual.
- He made no mention of whether 500 BTC, 2250 ETH & 425 LTC are in the bankroll or not
Response: How am I suppose to know, just like how would you  know? I said site gave freeroll and overlay in tournaments for months and sportsbook was getting crushed by proffesional gamblers maybe this is where those funds went but like I said how the hell am I suppose to know. But your making claims like you know for a fact where they went when you have no clue just like I do, but I will just say I don't know, you don't choose to speculate where they went you just act as if you know  it's a fact.

- He made no mention of the 20 BTC +EV that winners not paid in the 2018 Christmas Wager
reponse: We gone over this over and over but the answer you get is never good enough. The prizepool was filled with cheaters, people who won and cashed out freerolled the site and people who lost, were refunded what they lost, Dean only lost in this situation and players did not lose out, and go figure people cheated when they saw a opportunity to win some +ev money ( as a poker professional for over a decade i know first hand that people will cheat in tournaments when they see overlay with multiple entries this is not uncommon at all)  

- He made no mention of the BKB tokens from the 100 million that were supposed to provide for new games and a new website but did neither
Response: I don't know anything about this, but the site did have roullette at one time and I believe it is coming back very soon and more to follow

You can put me back on ignore but your not doing yourself any favors by doing so. Please remove my bad trust rating we both know you giving it to me is completely unjust.

[RHavar]

Ps Rhavar can you get someone to lock most of these threads but the main BK and leave Jolly one of these threads rather than him pumping all 5 several times throughout the day. I have emailed plenty of mods they don't care what I think.

I don't have any special privileges, but I have suggested several times that I think game-protect should be banned (almost all his posts are thinly veiled ads or links to a scam service) and that all-but-one of JollyGood's threads locked or merged (actually: hopefully JollyGood can do that voluntarily, as it serves no one by having discussion split up like that).


 

This is where a interesting conversation starts. I was a ico investor and I have received no special treatment. My 1st reaction was anger. As for Dean being frugal you must have not been around when he was doing daily tournaments and freerolls with overlay day after day in poker tournaments. Also is reported that pro gamblers were crushing the sportsbook due to the favorable odds.

Fair enough. I know Dean has run a lot of pretty generous promotions. Something I think is a bad idea, as you attract edge-hunters, and not gamblers.

According to what I have heard is that Dean was buying back tokens from people who were unhappy with the ico (did not know this was occurring). So some investors were able to exit without a loss and even a profit from BKB investment on site.

The reason those investors were unhappy was because the BKB token was pegged to USD, but BTC was going through the roof. So they thought it was unfair that Dean makes a (personal) profit at their expense (compared to if they just kept the BTC, and never invested). I always defending Dean, because this was the terms and Dean repeatedly said that had price gone down, he would've personally compensated investors out of pocket.

 

   Is renegging on a promise a scam? That is a question that I think each person can define differently. Now if intent was good but methodology was bad is it a outright scam?  Do you think Dean intent was for this to occur?

No, of course not. I'm sure it was his intentions that bitcoin price went and stayed high, and then he would've made a huge personal profit and none of the mess happened. But bitcoin price did drop. And those BKB tokens represent a debt he had to people.  If Dean was an honest person who treated his obligations seriously, he would've put every effort to honor his debt (up until the point of bankruptcy).

He made a bet bitcoin price would go and stay up. He got it wrong, and he owes money for that. It's just not fair or honest to be like "lolz sorry, turns out I bet wrong. Let's just ignore that and pretend it never happened". And let's also not pretend Dean doesn't have the resources to actually repay his investors he screwed. He's no doubt netted a few million from his little ICO scam, and if memory serves (I might be wrong, I'd need to check) I was in talks with him to sell him my site for 10M dollars.  He's only motivation here is unabridged greed.

[BetKing.io]

let's also not pretend Dean doesn't have the resources to actually repay his investors he screwed. He's no doubt netted a few million from his little ICO scam, and if memory serves (I might be wrong, I'd need to check) I was in talks with him to sell him my site for 10M dollars.  He's only motivation here is unabridged greed.

Again, making assumptions and stating opinions as if they are facts. Just like jolly good.

You know absolutely nothing of what our costs were in the past year and a half. You don't know what was spent on marketing, promos, development (you say frugal, I had 6 devs working for me for a year, they don't work for free).

Here's the other thing, you or any of these trolls don't need to know either as you had no BKB anyway.
I am in direct contact with all my biggest token holders and we have chatted about all the changes for many months. It's not a public discussion.

You don't know people who bought the ico or how they feel. I did say that 600 btc (the bankroll funds since we made no profit) was used to buy back tokens. That is 600 btc that comes right out the bankroll. Remember 50% was meant to be used for the bankroll? Well that obviously drops doesn't it? More tokens were bought back when price was actually low as no one wanted to sell when btc price was 20k and it was only 3 months into the project. It's been going down since.

You know, as well as I know your issue, that I couldn't sell btc when it was at the top so don't act like I profited millions. No bank would give me an account.
The btc remained as btc up to 20k and down to 3k, except when paying our expenses.

So when I changed to this model I owned 70% of all BKB (you lot seem to want to ignore that fact, 600 btc of the original funds was used to buy these tokens).
20% has been converted to the new token by holders who are clearly in favor of the direction we are going in.
There's a small amount that will never be claimed (old bounties, promo wins etc) and there's a few people who might be unhappy or are waiting to see how the new system goes. But that certainly doesn't show scam.

Businesses fail every day. It doesn't make them scams.
I was the biggest investor in this that lost, I put over $1 million of my own money into the business.
Businesses change models or pivot all the time, especially if the old model didn't work which clearly it didn't here.
It's obvious to me that the majority of people are in fact in support of the changes and I feel that this way will be far more profitable. For a start, traffic and profit is actually increasing now.


Use some logic. If I was a scammer, why would I still be running the site? I mean my lawyers have told me I can close it and have no legal obligation to buy back any tokens.
Why would I not have just closed right after ICO instead of spending on dev/marketing?
Why would I not have stole investment in 2016 instead of returning it to everyone?
Why would I not decide even that BK relaunch wasn't doing well after a year and just get out then while we still had money?
A scammer doesn't hang about the scene for 5 years.

Got any other assumptions you want to make without knowing anything of how the business actually works? Because your trust feedback you left shows you don't have a clue.

[JollyGood]

Use some logic. If I was a scammer, why would I still be running the site? I mean my lawyers have told me I can close it and have no legal obligation to buy back any tokens.
Why would I not have just closed right after ICO instead of spending on dev/marketing?
Why would I not have stole investment in 2016 instead of returning it to everyone?
Why would I not decide even that BK relaunch wasn't doing well after a year and just get out then while we still had money?
A scammer doesn't hang about the scene for 5 years.

The answer to the above is: because that would be an out-and-out scam, a blatant open scam that would result in a criminal prosecution. Simple. The way this scam has played out has been much more subtle and it has been covered with some protection from accusations of fraud by running the business on the surface of it yet totally mismanaging everything related to it. Returning bankroll funds to investors does not warrant you deserving a medal nor does it give a seal for the rest of your life that you are a genuine and honest trader. You made plenty of money out of betking both pre-ICO and post-ICO.

You know absolutely nothing of what our costs were in the past year and a half. You don't know what was spent on marketing, promos, development (you say frugal, I had 6 devs working for me for a year, they don't work for free).

So why not tell everybody? If you want to hide it from "everybody" at least tell investors and BKB token holders. We know of BKB tokens holders that did not get that information because if they did they would have elaborated and we would have known too.

I have no recollection of a figure of 600 BTC ever being mentioned before with regards to buy-backs. It was clearly stated in the past "I have bought back 70% of all tokens" and then on another occasion "I have bought back 90% of all BKB tokens" but it was never mentioned even once that 600 BTC of bankroll was used to do it. That figure I see has dropped back down from 90% to 70% again.

* Nobody knows exactly how much bankroll BTC remains
* No mention was made of the $1 million you tried to scam out of RHavar
* This is the first time a figure of 6 devs working for 12 months was given but no explanation why there was no physical noticeble changes on betking.io
* The white paper mentioned apps and new games and development but literally nothing happened apart from old games me re-added and later removed
* How much of the 600 BTC was used to buy up your own BKB holdings?
* Why use bankroll funds to buy BKB tokens when that is not what the bankroll funds were supposed to be used for?
* "Frugal" and "economical with information" are factual issues in this case because drips of selective information being released by a dictator as and when he pleases, is NOT the way forward. It never was.

Had there been more openness from the beginning then maybe much of the issues could have been addressed earlier.

Simple steps such as publishing post-ICO 2017 wallet addresses, monthly/quarterly bulletins stating number of buy-backs and at which cost as well as other information such as ALL expenses, ALL gross/net profits, traffic numbers and other info would have been a great start but all that was suppressed. The idea one can simply say that "businesses pivot all the time" therefore brush aside all concerns and not elaborate on issues of importance to investors or token holders - is unacceptable. Having the ICO did not allow a dictatorship to take place. Sure it put almost infinite control over the project but with that control comes responsibility. Throwing a tantrum and refusing to answer questions about the state of play is not the way any business owner should behave.

To say BKB tokens holders or ICO investors had that information but nobody else could or should have it is something that was a bad move on your part. Anyway not all token holders had ALL the information, they were searching for it themselves and had to wait until you gave it to them.

Had you at least answered some of the questions I asked at the time of the ICO and post-ICO then people would have been more informed. Even now the whole thing is close-guarded and clouded in secrecy.

Anyway, all the evidence suggests extremely weak business acumen at the very least and a much serious matter of a scam at the other end of the spectrum and the reason for those assumptions existing are because you yourself have created a toxic environment. You still have time to right some of the wrongs and gain some credibility before betking meets its eventual demise.

About the mining, I really curious about it, on every $1 we will get 100 BKT which is on the current price is around $0.0002 amd it will be distributed to every single investors depends on its investment right? I know last time your site is really good but currently there is so many issues within. I just wonder if some big investors might want to get it here. And btw is there any guarantee that you guys do not eat up our money? Because there will be such attempt here, sorry no offence

Anyway what happened to the old thread?

That's not how it works.

What's with the nonsense?
"I know last time your site is really good but currently there is so many issues within. I just wonder if some big investors might want to get it here. And btw is there any guarantee that you guys do not eat up our money? Because there will be such attempt here, sorry no offence"

I think I might need to add you to the auto delete list.

Players get 100 BKT credited to their account automatically for every $1 wagered, regardless of what crypto they bet with. Bet mining has nothing to do with either bankroll investors or BKT token holders.

You honestly have literally next to nothing in social skills, you have no idea how to debate to engage with people/users/customers and you have written with that attitude to many users in the past.

[BetKing.io]

...

I'll reply once since even though you are still wrong in what you say and still continue to attack, there's a hint of some possible discussion here.

You made plenty of money out of betking both pre-ICO and post-ICO.

Not true. I lost millions of $ since the ICO.

I have no recollection of a figure of 600 BTC ever being mentioned before with regards to buy-backs. It was clearly stated in the past "I have bought back 70% of all tokens" and then on another occasion "I have bought back 90% of all BKB tokens" but it was never mentioned even once that 600 BTC of bankroll was used to do it. That figure I see has dropped back down from 90% to 70% again.

Doesn't matter if you remember or not. It's been public. The main point is that all token holders were allowed access to a private Telegram group.
We discussed business decisions and spending and stats in there. They were not the concern of this forum. There was no need to post anything in this forum. Any large holders that didn;t want to discuss in Telegram were in contact via email.

I also never once said I bought 90% of tokens. I did say that up to 20% were willing to swap for BitSafe tokens which would bring the figure closer to 90%, most of these people have now converted to the new BKT token.

* Nobody knows exactly how much bankroll BTC remains

Never needed to be made public here.

* This is the first time a figure of 6 devs working for 12 months was given but no explanation why there was no physical noticeble changes on betking.io
* The white paper mentioned apps and new games and development but literally nothing happened apart from old games me re-added and later removed

Had there been more openness from the beginning then maybe much of the issues could have been addressed earlier.

Again, any business decisions or spending or expenses was not information that was to be made public or of interest to anyone on this forum. Instead of any discussion you make assumptions and claim them as fact. We done a tonne of development on the site.
Any site owner would be able to tell you that it's not just the design that shows work being done. We have worked on BetKing non stop. Old games can't just be re-added and integrations of other services are not easy. You are not a developer (i saw your request looking for one). There is always things behind the scenes to be working on that most users wouldn't notice.
Look at BitDice, 8-10m raised in ICO and site is the same a year and a half later. With no scam accusations. What has been done there? Behind the scenes development that no one notices much.

Simple steps such as publishing post-ICO 2017 wallet addresses, monthly/quarterly bulletins stating number of buy-backs and at which cost as well as other information such as ALL expenses, ALL gross/net profits, traffic numbers and other info would have been a great start but all that was suppressed.

Again, a private company and that information did not need to be made public. But was always shared with token holders anyway. This forum isn't where these things are communicated.

Throwing a tantrum and refusing to answer questions about the state of play is not the way any business owner should behave.

You have spent a year on this smear campaign attacking me personally and BetKing. Why would I have continued to answer your questions?
You always either ignored them and post more spam over the top with false claims of scam or you twist my words to suit your narrative.
All while not having a single cent invested in the site. You were not a token holder. You didn't need to be informed of anything related to the business of BetKing.

To say BKB tokens holders or ICO investors had that information but nobody else could or should have it is something that was a bad move on your part. Anyway not all token holders had ALL the information, they were searching for it themselves and had to wait until you gave it to them.

Had you at least answered some of the questions I asked at the time of the ICO and post-ICO then people would have been more informed. Even now the whole thing is close-guarded and clouded in secrecy.

Most did have the information, certainly the largest percentage of $ value did. We obviously can't reach everyone but posting on this forum was not the answer. Especially when you spent a year doing this. You have done far more harm to investors and the website than I ever could.

Anyway, all the evidence suggests extremely weak business acumen at the very least and a much serious matter of a scam at the other end of the spectrum and the reason for those assumptions existing are because you yourself have created a toxic environment. You still have time to right some of the wrongs and gain some credibility before betking meets its eventual demise.

Now we're getting somewhere.
I've admitted many times that I could have run the business far better or done things differently. But it is not a scam to run a business poorly. It is not a scam to spend money on things that didn't bring an ROI.
Token holders can see the steps that have been taken to try and turn things around.
We have a new, much improved and built from scratch platform (regardless of what you say about the look or whatever). It has shown an increase in players and profit for token holders and bankroll investors already with the numbers growing each week.
I personally don't make a single penny off of the new platform yet. I hold tokens but they are essentially locked from circulation at this time. I want to see the platform and player base built up and original BKB holders see a positive return (even though there are few left) before I consider making any profit.


P.S

You honestly have literally next to nothing in social skills, have no idea how to debate to engage with people/users/customers

Yeah well that's how I talk to people who have attacked me in the past or who have trolled, posted loaded questions, false assumptions or generally people who have no real interest in discussion or the site.
That's exactly what that user did and he is only looking to bump his signature campaign post count.

[JollyGood]

Have you made a distinction between BKB/BKT token holders and actual investors because I am aware of token holders from BKB who are not privy to the information that you say has been made available to them?

I asked several questions to a token holder about the state of affairs related to betking but he did not know the answers citing lack of information from you. Once token holders have that information you cannot censor them, it is their decision what they choose to do with it (ie share it or make it public or not).

Even Cloudbet (which has a disastrous reputation) gave their wallet details when they were facing (rightly so) claims of scamming their users. That alleviated fear of many of their customers when allegations of insolvency were raised. You might be correct from your perspective about not wanting to give information out to non-investors but even those holding tokens do not have information too.

I will ask the token holder to ask you for the answers to the most important questions. Regardless of whether that person is in your good books or not he is a token holder and has a right to know the answers to any and all questions related to betking. Those answers just might shed a little light on matters.

You made no reference to the allegation you tried to dupe RHavar out a $1 million. I remember reading the original post in the Bustabit thread where he cited you were trying to talk him in to investing claiming you had mechanisms in place to protect investors crypto and now the amount has been stated so things are looking quite dire. Again it seems the evidence suggests you knew things were not going and were not going to improve soon (or ever) yet you tried to sell him an unbelievable story just to get him in to investing. Can you elaborate on this?

You also tried to raise phenomenal amounts of funds in another ICO for your "bitsafe crypto exchange" project a few months ago and made it clear betking would be closed and all BKB tokens would become bitsafe tokens. This information was not made available widely yet you still kept yout BKB investment link on betking while you were trying to raise money for the bitsafe ICO. Why?