Hhampuz being campaign manager of casinos with no adress or license

[Foxpup]

Play 2 minutes poker and you will see it yourself how many times you will have a near full street.

Oh, come on. I don't even play poker, and even I know that's more common than a two-pair. There's a reason every "poker for noobs" guide tells you not to chase a straight. If you're even worse at cards than I am, you should stick to roulette instead of blaming casinos for your own stupidity.

[Thule]

...

In the real world math>feelings, reality is a lovely place you should try it one day!

Don't worry about my math.Its better than 99% of peoples on this forum where i don't need it to see if something like that is a scam or not.

But i would recommend to check your own principles since they seem to be not suitable for society

[Thule]

Play 2 minutes poker and you will see it yourself how many times you will have a near full street.

Oh, come on. I don't even play poker, and even I know that's more common than a two-pair. There's a reason every "poker for noobs" guide tells you not to chase a straight. If you're even worse at cards than I am, you should stick to roulette instead of blaming casinos for your own stupidity.

You wanna tell its normal to have from 40 games 10 times instantly 4 from 5 cards for a full street ?

[LoyceMobile]

Thule, I have only one question: if you want physical addresses and government approval, why are you in crypto?

[Findingnemo]

Thule, I have only one question: if you want physical addresses and government approval, why are you in crypto?

Knocked out..!


His/her intention is to attack Hhampuz,not to save any one from following or falling into any scam sites.

[Thule]

Thule, I have only one question: if you want physical addresses and government approval, why are you in crypto?

I guess i will have to destroy your false imagination but crypto isn't anonymous and expecially not BTC.
And an online casino is not crypto its only using crypto.If a player wants to be "anonymous" in the way BTC makes it possible i have no problem with it.
But if the operator of that website wants to be anonymous to be able to make ilegal activity by scamming people as thats what its being classified between players when somebody manipulates "fair games"
than thats something totaly diffrent.

Also i'm asking myself why you ask me this kind of question and not other DT members when they attack ICO's for a lack of adress or company information.

Your support seems to be extremly one sided.

His/her intention is to attack Hhampuz,not to save any one from following or falling into any scam sites.

I said it before i don't know Hhampuz so i don't care if he has success or not and its nothing personal.
Its only disgusting to see how you defend a scam by trying to change the topic into a personal attack.

[Findingnemo]

His/her intention is to attack Hhampuz,not to save any one from following or falling into any scam sites.

I said it before i don't know Hhampuz so i don't care if he has success or not and its nothing personal.
Its only disgusting to see how you defend a scam by trying to change the topic into a personal attack.

When you want to really prove that they were scam sites,just provide some proofs or people will call you as troll.

Nothing personal,I just want to say how you need to handle this.

[Thule]

His/her intention is to attack Hhampuz,not to save any one from following or falling into any scam sites.

I said it before i don't know Hhampuz so i don't care if he has success or not and its nothing personal.
Its only disgusting to see how you defend a scam by trying to change the topic into a personal attack.

When you want to really prove that they were scam sites,just provide some proofs or people will call you as troll.

Nothing personal,I just want to say how you need to handle this.

Its already proofen.
1.no physical adress
2.no company info
3.no license #
4.unnatural high amounts of cards near full street


You can proof anytime one of these 4 points as invalid.

Am still waiting for it.
Haven't seen it and it would just take 2 minutes to do so if i were wrong

[hulla]

Thule, I have only one question: if you want physical addresses and government approval, why are you in crypto?

Never mind this guy I think he want to be notice because the last time I checked Hhampuz told him to reach out on their ANN thread if he have any questions regarding the company and until now no scam activities was said to have happen through the company.
So what's his stress.

[Thule]

Thule, I have only one question: if you want physical addresses and government approval, why are you in crypto?

Never mind this guy I think he want to be notice because the last time I checked Hhampuz told him to reach out on their ANN thread if he have any questions regarding the company and until now no scam activities was said to have happen through the company.
So what's his stress.

What are you smokin ?When did i ever talked with Hhampuz on any thread on that forum ?

So many false accusations coming now from people with casino signatures.

[Stedsm]

Thule, I have only one question: if you want physical addresses and government approval, why are you in crypto?

Never mind this guy I think he want to be notice because the last time I checked Hhampuz told him to reach out on their ANN thread if he have any questions regarding the company and until now no scam activities was said to have happen through the company.
So what's his stress.

What are you smokin ?When did i ever talked with Hhampuz on any thread on that forum ?

Imma smokin weed, don't tell me what I did
Don't show ya pity, it's all about anonymity
Ya points are baseless, giving us all too much stress
As electrifying as joule, come everyone let's f*ck Thule

 

So many false accusations coming now from people with casino signatures.

FTFY. And come on, even if the vendor chooses to remain behind the scenes but still providing better services, I don't mind playing at their door. If you think it's too much, why not stop even those dark market trades?

[cryptohunter]

I do not trust hhampuz.
The reason for that is quite simply he supports proven liars and trust abusers on DT. That alone is reason enough to doubt him. I do not say he is as bad as some but merely supporting them is enough to create sensible suspicion and caution.

I think Thule does have a clear point here after reading through the thread.

If ico's were demonstrating these clear and obvious ID avoidance tactics they could be presumed "possible" scams.
Many DT's would be slapping red on them and anyone that supported them.

I mean ask yourself what means of retribution would you have if these casinos did scam you?

I observe clear double standards once again. On the one hand they fight against the implementation of criteria that would mean red trust can be applied  ONLY to scammers or  those STRONGLY likely to scam. Rather they are claiming it is too late by then and a preemptive strike against them is required to save people from these "possible" scams.

However, here I notice the same people demanding to see proof of scam before any action or criticism is forthcoming from them. Almost defending the ID avoidance tactics now it suits them.

I say that a "responsible" member would not be promoting nor enabling these types of casinos if they want to take the "preemptive" action they advocate for everyone else and any project they are not making money from.
If they believe innocent until they scam or try to scam then fair enough, but their prior arguments suggest this is clear selfishly motivated double standards.

It all boils down to making some btc dust.

[hulla]

Thule, I have only one question: if you want physical addresses and government approval, why are you in crypto?

Never mind this guy I think he want to be notice because the last time I checked Hhampuz told him to reach out on their ANN thread if he have any questions regarding the company and until now no scam activities was said to have happen through the company.
So what's his stress.

What are you smokin ?When did i ever talked with Hhampuz on any thread on that forum ?

So many false accusations coming now from people with casino signatures.

This is not an accusations or what so ever. What I'm trying to point out is that I don't see any reason why you still have to create a thread if your planned was not about creating some drama despite Hhampuz respond to your claim. However, crypto community don't mind a project with good record which didn't provide any information than giving false information and I'm saying this because I have seen a ICO project which didn't provide any information but provide good record and the investors are fine with it.

if you guys have a problem with Hhampuz take it out on him not the project he handle.

I do not trust hhampuz.
The reason for that is quite simply he supports proven liars and trust abusers on DT. That alone is reason enough to doubt him. I do not say he is as bad as some but merely supporting them is enough to create sensible suspicion and caution.

I think Thule does have a clear point here after reading through the thread.

If ico's were demonstrating these clear and obvious ID avoidance tactics they could be presumed "possible" scams.
Many DT's would be slapping red on them and anyone that supported them.

I mean ask yourself what means of retribution would you have if these casinos did scam you?

I observe clear double standards once again. On the one hand they fight against the implementation of criteria that would mean red trust can be applied  ONLY to scammers or  those STRONGLY likely to scam. Rather they are claiming it is too late by then and a preemptive strike against them is required to save people from these "possible" scams.

However, here I notice the same people demanding to see proof of scam before any action or criticism is forthcoming from them. Almost defending the ID avoidance tactics now it suits them.

I say that a "responsible" member would not be promoting nor enabling these types of casinos if they want to take the "preemptive" action they advocate for everyone else and any project they are not making money from.
If they believe innocent until they scam or try to scam then fair enough, but their prior arguments suggest this is clear selfishly motivated double standards.

It all boils down to making some btc dust.

h
When six people agreed with something, what can a single man do to oppose it? When we both know that  majority win vote under majority rule and last time I checked Hhampuz didn't give you any red trust. Why should be blame for the what others did?

[tbct_mt2]

~snip~

Whatever you want to discuss here, I recommend you to use snip, ~snip~, -snip-, ~, < ... >, whatever you want to eliminate un-used part of posts' contents that you want to discuss with.
Only quote exactly part of contents you want to discuss.
It will help to save more space in page and help readers easier to known which points you really want to discuss with posts' authors.

[cryptohunter]

@hulla

If someone does something that is proven untrustworthy and you know this to be the case yet you still promote them or enable them into positions of trust that therefore shows bad character.

This though was just my disclaimer and not really attached to main and relevant part of my post.

The point that I make about the double standards NOT just of Hhampuz but actually more in relation to the noob ass licking trash who oppose waiting for proof of scam or at a minimum a solid case to suggest STRONGLY intention of scam before red trusting who are now claiming there is no proof of scam here.

You either want to wait for proof of scam or else you are going to make preemptive red strikes against those you think are displaying behaviours that suggest they could intend to scam. For instance masking their ID's/addresses to limit and prevent any retribution IF they do scam.

I am of the opinion that one should wait for EVIDENCE or PROOF of scam before giving the scam tag or some behaviour that STRONGLY suggests intent to scam. However hhampuz supports clearly red tagging for merely speaking the truth about his pals as he has openly supported them with his inclusions and also some of his prior posts.

So that's where we are. Double standards, supporting proven liars, proven and self confessed trust abusers, and now working with and supporting/promoting/being paid by "possibly" dubious projects himself.

I mean this is a debate so people are free to make their rebuttals to my posts. I welcome them and any debate on these types of issues.

[Hhampuz]

@CH, again you seem to confuse me with someone who runs around calling out scams and painting accounts red.. This is not me so how is it double standards? My trust list is my business, just as yours is your business.

[asche]

Its already proofen.
1.no physical adress
2.no company info
3.no license #
4.unnatural high amounts of cards near full street

C'mon Thule stop this non sense.

Even if you were right, why just write about it like some mad kid. Gather data, document it, and PROVE it.

Writting that it has been proven doesn't mean it is. Are you 10 yo?!

[Thule]

Its already proofen.
1.no physical adress
2.no company info
3.no license #
4.unnatural high amounts of cards near full street

C'mon Thule stop this non sense.

Even if you were right, why just write about it like some mad kid. Gather data, document it, and PROVE it.

Writting that it has been proven doesn't mean it is. Are you 10 yo?!

You know asche i'm going to document it when i have a bit more time.Remember i don't make a dime out of this forum and need to make some preparations for may which is very soon.

I just would like to know how does it come that you approve double standards ?
I mean DT members had no issues with a group of DT members tagging projects which have no adress no company info or anything and described them because of that as scam.
Here the online casinos which could get easily a company registration on an island are not providing any info at all.They hide 100% .
Why don't you demand the same actions of these DT members like on the other projects ?

I mean if you run with open eyes you can clearly see why they have no company information or license number because they are not running a "fair game" system but are intended to milk their members with unfair games displaying opportunities which in reality are manufactured by their unfair game system.


Why don't you have the same standard here ?

I mean when somebody claims a project is cheating normaly tons of DT's instantly check for evidences.
Here you can see not a single DT even tries to find any evidence since its not in their intention.


The decent DT's on this forum haven't posted a word on this thread which i personly take as a silent confirmation of my opinion.


Or take a global mod from that thread which is supporting these people with actions he is not supposed to do as mod.

One example is i posted the info on Hhampuz campaign that the website is by law ilegal because thats the truth nobody can deny.

The promoted website has no physical adress or company info at all and doesn't provide any license to run this kind of website legally.It doesn't even have Terms and Conditions

Would i post it on any other ico you can bet this statement wouldn't be deleted.
But maybe you can tell me why the post was inappropiote informing people about the website that it has no info at all ?

It's called business protection...

[asche]

You know asche i'm going to document it when i have a bit more time.Remember i don't make a dime out of this forum and need to make some preparations for may which is very soon.

Then you should have waited, and gathered evidence first. Once you do and your evidence is posted, I will be the first to back you.

I mean if you run with open eyes you can clearly see why they have no company information or license number because they are not running a "fair game" system but are intended to milk their members with unfair games displaying opportunities which in reality are manufactured by their unfair game system.

Or maybe they are just commiting tax evasion, or don't want to do any paper work while still offering a legit and fair game.

I mean when somebody claims a project is cheating normaly tons of DT's instantly check for evidences.

Maybe you should have posted in investigation board. People might have looked into you and helped you.

I don't know about the other DT's, for my part I have no time to actually check for it by myself.

Or take a global mod from that thread which is supporting these people with actions he is not supposed to do as mod.

Says who?

One example is i posted the info on Hhampuz campaign that the website is by law ilegal because thats the truth nobody can deny.

The law of which country?

[cryptohunter]

@CH, again you seem to confuse me with someone who runs around calling out scams and painting accounts red.. This is not me so how is it double standards? My trust list is my business, just as yours is your business.

I am clearly saying that you are a person who SUPPORTS those that do FAR worse.
Exclude those that do run around painting accounts red for pointing out the fact they are liars then I can take you more seriously.
You openly support in DT some of the most shady individuals here. You also happen to exclude the same persons.

I am not saying you are as bad as they are. However even supporting these types opens you up to criticisms that would otherwise perhaps have no grounding.

If you do NOT support red trusting persons on NON scamming issues then that is different. Please demonstrate this by excluding proven trust abusers and proven liars who go much further and use red trust to silence the truth of their wrong doing being spoken.

Campaign managers are in a very precarious position when you think about this because their behaviour reflects upon 1/ the project and their choice to hire you, 2/ the investors in those projects (if icos I mean any project using someone who openly supports liars, trust abusers, and other such shady events in their history clearly are not doing their research)  3/ the sig spammers who rely on payments.

So any mud that sticks to a campaign manager not only damages them it damages the project that chooses to use them. If projects were made aware of this but still decided to use their services then that could look even worse for them.

I would distance myself from any persons that have observable events in their history that casts them in a very untrustworthy light. I would certainly not be seen to advocate their placement in a trust system and also collude to exclude those persons they exclude.

It is not only the actions you take that reflect upon you, it is also the actions of those that you openly support and seemingly condone on the one hand then wonder why people are questioning your double standards when you seem very willing to wait for proof of scam when it benefits you financially.

Eventually those that seem entrenched in the DT and merit cycle of power will start to lose their grasp on such power and those that thought it prudent to support them will regret it,  that will always be their in their post history.

That laudas cat club thread or whatever (that you started) was funny but i think that club needs to realise they must undo their trust abuse and clean up their act else that club has no future here except to be made pariahs.