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

[BetKing.io]

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).

The scam accusations were against token holders who bought tokens in ICO. So if I said investors at any time I'm usually meaning people who had BKB.
As said, can't reach them all but the majority (if you sum the total $ value of tokens I didn't own) all had this info and were kept up to date with changes.

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.

If it's who I think it is it is someone who refuses to prove to me that he owned tokens and won't give me his BetKing username and so I can't prove he actually is a token holder and so I don't have to explain anything there.

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?

That was a private conversation between someone I have spoken with frequently for 5 years and he thinks it's OK to just post things in a public forum. I have 5 years of chat logs with lots of personal info he has said to me in confidence. I would never dream of posting that here.
He can choose to believe if it was a scam attempt if he likes but it certainly wasn't.
We were discussing the act of loaning to others as a business (not me asking for a loan at that point).
He said he was open to it and then gave me the example of loaning me $1mm, I hadn't asked for any amount at that time.
Since he was open to the business of loaning and suggested the amount, I asked. I then suggested he could buy tokens instead. That would be like getting interest if I would have used it for BetKing and the token price went up due to any site profit increase.
He was adamant we had to get others involved in escrow and that I had to send him the exact same amount that he was loaning.
IMO that is not a loan. There was no point us just trading $1mm in btc for $1mm btc so I declined. I also don't trust anyone enough to escrow that amount, especially the people he suggested.
At that time there was no plan to change direction of the site or to change buyback model etc so there was 100% absolutely no intention to scam someone I trusted and considered a friend (even if it was just online).
Yet he posts private conversations in public that are no one's business and leaves red trust saying I scammed investors with no proof and the whole nonsense about stealing Bustabit. Note it was removed a few days after they started attacking and he still has red trust on my name.

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?

That info was made available to every single token holder. I emailed them all personally or contacted as many on telegram and skype.
It was also posted on the website.

[1715387070]

1715387070

[1715387070]

1715387070

[1715387070]

1715387070

[1715387070]

1715387070

[RHavar]

That was a private conversation between someone I have spoken with frequently for 5 years and he thinks it's OK to just post things in a public forum. I have 5 years of chat logs with lots of personal info he has said to me in confidence. I would never dream of posting that here.

I'm sorry, but you were the first one to quote me out of context to justify pirating software -- to both the Crypto Gambling Foundation. You also repeatedly tried to push me into buying significant amounts of BKB right before canceling the buyback promise (the only thing giving them real value) right before promising you would not.

and the whole nonsense about stealing Bustabit. Note it was removed a few days after they started attacking

The way you acted there was disgusting. You were repeatedly told and asked that you were not allowed to use the code in a production (and commercial) site without paying the license fee (2 btc). Yet you ignored, deflected and did it anyway and then you decided to run it for a few more days to see how popular it would be before buying (something that was repeatedly were told was not allowed by the license).

But worse than that, (copyright violation is not that big of a deal in my books) you started lying about it. And then obfuscating the code and claiming it was a total rewrite. WTF? That's how a broke 14 year old runs a business.  And to the best of my knowledge you still have never apologized and paid Daniel his 2 bitcoin.

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.

You're trying to pretend people are blaming you for running a failed business. You are blamed because you promised to personally buy back tokens for the purpose of exposing yourself to BTC. You were more than happy when it was going your way, but the second turns around you just cancel it for "business reasons". If we cut the bullshit, you had a moral obligation to buy back those tokens until the point of your personal bankruptcy.

Use some logic. If I was a scammer, why would I still be running the site?

Dunno. Maybe it helps you feel better about the millions you scammed? We both know your site has zero potential left, casinos live and die on trust. After screwing investors, canceling promotions, no rational person will play on your site (assuming they even find it buried under the listings for betking.com in the SERP)

[BetKing.io]

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.

You're trying to pretend people are blaming you for running a failed business. You are blamed because you promised to personally buy back tokens for the purpose of exposing yourself to BTC. You were more than happy when it was going your way, but the second turns around you just cancel it for "business reasons". If we cut the bullshit, you had a moral obligation to buy back those tokens until the point of your personal bankruptcy.

Go and get me a list of all the people that think I scammed them with that decision and the amount of tokens they hold.
I think you will find it would be a small list. I know that it can't possibly be even 10-20% of all the tokens that were ever in circulation and I would wager that the majority of those don't think it's a scam and the rest probably didn't understand the old token or the new one.

Even better. Find me a single person who has lost money by buying BKB in the ICO.
One single person, that didn't decide to sell for less than the last buy back price since that would be their own choice.

There is not a single BKB holder who has lost money through me or BetKing
 

[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).

The scam accusations were against token holders who bought tokens in ICO. So if I said investors at any time I'm usually meaning people who had BKB.
As said, can't reach them all but the majority (if you sum the total $ value of tokens I didn't own) all had this info and were kept up to date with changes.

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.

If it's who I think it is it is someone who refuses to prove to me that he owned tokens and won't give me his BetKing username and so I can't prove he actually is a token holder and so I don't have to explain anything there.

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?

That was a private conversation between someone I have spoken with frequently for 5 years and he thinks it's OK to just post things in a public forum. I have 5 years of chat logs with lots of personal info he has said to me in confidence. I would never dream of posting that here.
He can choose to believe if it was a scam attempt if he likes but it certainly wasn't.
We were discussing the act of loaning to others as a business (not me asking for a loan at that point).
He said he was open to it and then gave me the example of loaning me $1mm, I hadn't asked for any amount at that time.
Since he was open to the business of loaning and suggested the amount, I asked. I then suggested he could buy tokens instead. That would be like getting interest if I would have used it for BetKing and the token price went up due to any site profit increase.
He was adamant we had to get others involved in escrow and that I had to send him the exact same amount that he was loaning.
IMO that is not a loan. There was no point us just trading $1mm in btc for $1mm btc so I declined. I also don't trust anyone enough to escrow that amount, especially the people he suggested.
At that time there was no plan to change direction of the site or to change buyback model etc so there was 100% absolutely no intention to scam someone I trusted and considered a friend (even if it was just online).
Yet he posts private conversations in public that are no one's business and leaves red trust saying I scammed investors with no proof and the whole nonsense about stealing Bustabit. Note it was removed a few days after they started attacking and he still has red trust on my name.

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?

That info was made available to every single token holder. I emailed them all personally or contacted as many on telegram and skype.
It was also posted on the website.

Sure it stands to reason if your policy is to not release that information to a non-token holder or somebody you cannot identify as a token holder then that is your decision regardless of what I or others think about it. The person I have in mind is a confirmed token holder.

One thing that certainly has happened in the recent past was that betking went from being a widely respected and widely used website to one that is a shadow of its former self and basically has no chance of attaining the heights of past glories.

After reading your posts I do have a degree of sympathy with you on certain issues and claims but right now they do not negate the problems with any general perception of betking. Some of your management/owner decisions have been disastrous and it seems by looking at how successful Primedice, Bustabit, Bustadice, Stake, Bitsler and several others are that betking will not make up lost ground.

Looking at the situation regarding LoyceV and his BKB holdings, it is a complete disaster that he was a token holder expecting to sell his tokens for around $700+ and was not aware of the situation regarding cancellation of the quarterly buy-back until after the event only to find his holdings worth just $8. I suggest that is at least one person that is not happy with their betking investment. You may cite it being business and business decisions have to be taken and that might well be true but the question has to come back full circle: why have the ICO tokens pegged to US$ instead of BTC?

In relation to the comments made by RHavar in this and the previous thread it seems several people came to side with him including owner/operators from other gaming sites. There have been several PR disasters for betking along the way:

* Trying to dupe RHavar in to private funding betking to the tune of $1 million
* Using the Crash software but not paying 2 BTC licence fee to devans - then blaming it on RHavar for the confusion
* The 20 BTC +EV Christmas 2018 Wager which was never paid out amid allegations of "mass cheating" but you never elaborated on what that means
* The betking 2017 ICO funds expenditure still shrouded in mystery

Personally I agree with RHavar that after you guaranteed the buy-back and your reputation at that time was solid, you should have bankrupted yourself if necessary in order to keep your word. I also agree with him when he says that betking has zero potential left. It will take a lot of money, effort and energy to try to lift betking but it is probably too late to save it - and if you really believed in it yourself you would not have tried to shut it down a few months ago in order to open your bitsafe crypto exchange.

It is when things like this happen (you not wanting to pay 2 BTC for licensed software) that questions arise about 1 BTC donation daily between 1st December 2017 to 25th December 2017. You had a golden opportunity to make phenomenal amounts of money and keep investors happy but the beginning of the end for betking started when you closed down in December 2016 with a view to having an ICO. That was designed primarily to bring you far more riches than you were making with other peoples bankroll.

What happens next? There is next to nothing in funding left and the website makes next to nothing in profit. One possibility would be to sell it and split the money between all investors that made less than 5% profit at the time they sold up. Other than that how can you turn it around make betking viable again?

On a personal level I find it hard to believe that 500 BTC, 2250 ETH & 425 were used for the bankroll and 500 BTC, 2250 ETH & 425 were used for marketing, promotions, SEO, design, development, server costs and legal. Keeping your own words in mind, with almost all of the bankroll gone on buy-backs there is NO way $3.25 million in 500 BTC, 2250 ETH & 425 were spent on marketing, promotions, SEO, design, development, server costs and legal because even the most incompetent business owner would not spend lavishly without care hence allegations of siphoning-off funds.

[LoyceV]

Go and get me a list of all the people that think I scammed them with that decision and the amount of tokens they hold.
I think you will find it would be a small list. I know that it can't possibly be even 10-20% of all the tokens that were ever in circulation and I would wager that the majority of those don't think it's a scam

Why would it be okay to screw over 10-20% of token holders? If it's such a small amount, why didn't you continue the buy backs?

the rest probably didn't understand the old token or the new one.

It's pretty easy to understand that I can only exchange my BKB tokens for something that's worth only 1%.

[JollyGood]

Go and get me a list of all the people that think I scammed them with that decision and the amount of tokens they hold.
I think you will find it would be a small list. I know that it can't possibly be even 10-20% of all the tokens that were ever in circulation and I would wager that the majority of those don't think it's a scam

Why would it be okay to screw over 10-20% of token holders? If it's such a small amount, why didn't you continue the buy backs?

the rest probably didn't understand the old token or the new one.

It's pretty easy to understand that I can only exchange my BKB tokens for something that's worth only 1%.

The owner/operator of betking did not reply to you here. Did he reply in a PM?

I mentioned earlier in a post I have a degree of sympathy for him but it does not negate his incompetence as a business owner/operator while playing with millions of US$ of other people money. The sympathy is purely because he is (and always was) way out of his depth when trying to manage betking. In the chase for instant riches he let this project slide in to oblivion essentially because of his own greed.

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.

I am looking forward to reading his next set of replies before deciding on what I do next. To give him some credit, he addressed some of the points raised by those asking questions and it was a step in the right direction but he skipped past several important points raised and questions asked. His version of events for example about how he did not try to dupe RHavar is frankly hard to accept and his continuous avoiding/addressing points raised just add more red flags to any potential game player or investor betking might have.

Him not addressing the fact that he gave his word he would cover all losses for token holders even if BTC dropped to $1.

It seems he has used every excuse in the book to protect himself while allowing token holders to get the worst possible deal.

[LoyceV]

Go and get me a list of all the people that think I scammed them with that decision and the amount of tokens they hold.
I think you will find it would be a small list. I know that it can't possibly be even 10-20% of all the tokens that were ever in circulation and I would wager that the majority of those don't think it's a scam

Why would it be okay to screw over 10-20% of token holders? If it's such a small amount, why didn't you continue the buy backs?

the rest probably didn't understand the old token or the new one.

It's pretty easy to understand that I can only exchange my BKB tokens for something that's worth only 1%.

The owner/operator of betking did not reply to you here. Did he reply in a PM?

No, he told me by email a week ago that I can sell tokens at BetKing's exchange. The 1% is based on my math.

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.

I'd like to highlight this part, it surprises me. Without doing anything special, I can sell 200 BTC and withdraw 100,000 euro per day. And that's just at a local exchange. I haven't actually tested this (because I'm 200 BTC short), but that's not the point.
My point is: if I add a few more reputable international exchanges, it shouldn't be a problem to sell a few million worth of Bitcoin. Of course the bank would ask questions, but assuming everything is legit, that shouldn't be a problem.

[JollyGood]

Go and get me a list of all the people that think I scammed them with that decision and the amount of tokens they hold.
I think you will find it would be a small list. I know that it can't possibly be even 10-20% of all the tokens that were ever in circulation and I would wager that the majority of those don't think it's a scam

Why would it be okay to screw over 10-20% of token holders? If it's such a small amount, why didn't you continue the buy backs?

the rest probably didn't understand the old token or the new one.

It's pretty easy to understand that I can only exchange my BKB tokens for something that's worth only 1%.

The owner/operator of betking did not reply to you here. Did he reply in a PM?

No, he told me by email a week ago that I can sell tokens at BetKing's exchange. The 1% is based on my math.

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.

I'd like to highlight this part, it surprises me. Without doing anything special, I can sell 200 BTC and withdraw 100,000 euro per day. And that's just at a local exchange. I haven't actually tested this (because I'm 200 BTC short), but that's not the point.
My point is: if I add a few more reputable international exchanges, it shouldn't be a problem to sell a few million worth of Bitcoin. Of course the bank would ask questions, but assuming everything is legit, that shouldn't be a problem.

Yes the part you highlight is completely correct. I would never have imagined "No bank would give me an account" as an excuse. His excuses are so wrong on so many fronts.

[RHavar]

Here's some real comedy:

Even better. Find me a single person who has lost money by buying BKB in the ICO.
One single person, that didn't decide to sell for less than the last buy back price since that would be their own choice.

There is not a single BKB holder who has lost money through me or BetKing

According to one estimate:

No, he told me by email a week ago that I can sell tokens at BetKing's exchange. The 1% is based on my math.

Or do you have a loophole  "They only lost bitcoin! Bitcoin is not money!"   

[LoyceMobile]

I think the loophole is going to be that I didn't buy the tokens. But if that's the excuse, it means apparently some tokens are more equal than others.
I'm just speculating here, and would love to hear the real reason.

The claims are contradicting each other, if 600 Bitcoin was given back to token holders, a large share if the ico revenue was kept, and the remaining tokens are close to worthless, someone must have lost a lot of money!

[RHavar]

I think the loophole is going to be that I didn't buy the tokens. But if that's the excuse, it means apparently some tokens are more equal than others.
I'm just speculating here, and would love to hear the real reason.

I've heard in private from who have bought tokens and lost money, but it's not my place to name them (especially if they are angling to have Dean to privately honor the original terms of their sale).

But I do find it amusing the audacity of saying "no one lost money" after selling millions of dollars worth of tokens that went on to lose ~99% of their value and the majority (supposedly) were bought back at considerably under their sale price (i.e. when it was profitable for Dean to buy them back).

The claims are contradicting each other, if 600 Bitcoin was given back to token holders, a large share if the ico revenue was kept, and the remaining tokens are close to worthless, someone must have lost a lot of money!

Yeah, none of it really makes sense. I wouldn't be surprised that if after canceling the buy-backs, Dean was the one buying large quantities at super-discounted prices on his own exchange. Then as he accumulates large amounts of BKB he can say he bought lots back, but only had to pay a fraction of the "face value". And then he can blame investors for panic selling ("not my fault if they sold for really cheap!")

[JollyGood]

I think the loophole is going to be that I didn't buy the tokens. But if that's the excuse, it means apparently some tokens are more equal than others.
I'm just speculating here, and would love to hear the real reason.

The claims are contradicting each other, if 600 Bitcoin was given back to token holders, a large share if the ico revenue was kept, and the remaining tokens are close to worthless, someone must have lost a lot of money!

He can use loopholes all he likes, he clearly stated all token holders can ask about the state of the funds related to the ICO regardless if they were purchased or not. You have a right to ask him any question as much as anybody else and since you were there since the ICO days you have a right to know should you wish. In this case all BKB token holders are entitled by his own statements to know anything they like as he claims to have shared expenditure information with all token BKB holders though it would not apply to BKT token holders.

Why on earth would he use 600 BTC of the bankroll funds to buy-back BKB tokens? That was a pathetic management decision and I would like to know how many of those BKB were his personal tokens because what cannot be discounted from the options is that he took that step to line his own pockets. I would not put it past him by looking at his history.

And since that step was taken completely out of line with the ICO promises, why did he do it instead of using the other option which was to use the other 50% of ICO funds for "other" things? Why choose the bankroll to funds buy-backs instead of the 50% that was to be used for "marketing, promotions, SEO, design, development, server costs and legal"? Why choose one of the other in that order when there was no need to do anything except let business hopefully pick up and see profits increase? Why choose to decrease the bankroll to a fraction of that 50% that it should be when the site would collapse without a bankroll?

in previous posts he mentioned he bought back between 70% and 90% of BKB tokens but just yesterday he mentioned for the first time he used 600 BTC of the bankroll to do it. That is either pure mismanagement and incompetence on his part or it is possibly a calculated step in order to sell off his own BKB tokens in the process to line his own pockets.

Personally I would cite that he is a compulsive liar and a highly immature person judging by the tantrums he throws BUT there is no doubt about it in my mind he certainly made a lot of money off the back of the 2017 ICO and at least from some of the 50% that was supposed to be used for "marketing, promotions, SEO, design, development, server costs and legal". Add to that the temptation for a greedy individual such as him to see that massive bankroll and not be tempted to take some? I would not put it past him.

So why are the current BKT tokens and the previous BKB tokens almost worthless? Where have the ICO funds gone?

You as a token holder from the ICO days have a right to ask him. Please do and tell us the answers he gives you.

[LoyceV]

I think the loophole is going to be that I didn't buy the tokens. But if that's the excuse, it means apparently some tokens are more equal than others.
I'm just speculating here, and would love to hear the real reason.

I've heard in private from who have bought tokens and lost money, but it's not my place to name them (especially if they are angling to have Dean to privately honor the original terms of their sale).

But I do find it amusing the audacity of saying "no one lost money" after selling millions of dollars worth of tokens that went on to lose ~99% of their value and the majority (supposedly) were bought back at considerably under their sale price (i.e. when it was profitable for Dean to buy them back).

Lol, just as expected, there it is:

(note Loyce didn't even buy tokens in the ico, he got them from bounty)

[JollyGood]

I think the loophole is going to be that I didn't buy the tokens. But if that's the excuse, it means apparently some tokens are more equal than others.
I'm just speculating here, and would love to hear the real reason.

I've heard in private from who have bought tokens and lost money, but it's not my place to name them (especially if they are angling to have Dean to privately honor the original terms of their sale).

But I do find it amusing the audacity of saying "no one lost money" after selling millions of dollars worth of tokens that went on to lose ~99% of their value and the majority (supposedly) were bought back at considerably under their sale price (i.e. when it was profitable for Dean to buy them back).

Lol, just as expected, there it is:

(note Loyce didn't even buy tokens in the ico, he got them from bounty)

Your BKB tokens allow you to have access to information that scammer Dean Nolan will not provide to other investors and non-investors

Your tokens are not "lesser than other tokens" just because you received them in bounty.

You should ask that scammer Dean Nolan about how much bankroll remains and how much of the 50% of the ICO funds that were supposed to be used for "marketing, promotions, seo, design, development, server costs and legal"

And of course the main question about how many of the tokens bought in the buy-back with the 600 BTC actually belonged to investors and hoe many belonged to scammer Dean Nolan

[game-protect]

63 million Bkt mined already the halving is near!

Proof?

Are you the mining director or how do you know?

[LoyceV]

Your BKB tokens allow you to have access to information that scammer Dean Nolan will not provide to other investors and non-investors

I can send you a few tokens so you can ask Dean for all kinds of information.

[JollyGood]

Your BKB tokens allow you to have access to information that scammer Dean Nolan will not provide to other investors and non-investors

I can send you a few tokens so you can ask Dean for all kinds of information.

 

That scammer Dean Nolan would prefer his betking website house of cards to burn and crash down all around but he would never give me any information because he knows I am building a case against him to hand the the UK Police (Scotland Sheriff)

[JollyGood]

If anybody has the original 2017 whitepaper for the ICO please let me know because it will make up a crucial part of the evidence against scammer Dean Nolan if the UK Police (Scotland Sheriff) decide to prosecute.

[BillyBurns]

If anybody has the original 2017 whitepaper for the ICO please let me know because it will make up a crucial part of the evidence against scammer Dean Nolan if the UK Police (Scotland Sheriff) decide to prosecute.

Is that you game-protect?

[JollyGood]

Serial scammer Dean Nolan is using the Crash game on his scam betking website without paying the 2 BTC licence fee to the software owner.

Recently the betking logged-in user numbers has dropped to around just 10 so hopefully more and more people are getting to learn about the betking scam and its serial scammer owner Dean Nolan.

It is better for people to use Stake, Primedice, Bustabit or Bustadice than to use the betking scam website.