Game Protect flag

[actmyname]

In the real world "believing is not knowing" is an answer to the question what constitutes as a real-world definition/fact!

It seems that your definition of "real-world definition" is what you personally deem is accurate.Thus, if we want to consider it from a global perspective, your system of beliefs is not pragmatically relevant to users other than yourself henceforth reducing its usability to that of irrelevance.

[game-protect]

Real world definitions are defined by the majority of qualified real world participants and not by singular entities!

Extremely mentally ill bitcointalk accounts are not authorized to contribute to real world definitions!

[bones261]

"Believing is not knowing" constitutes as a real-world definition/fact!

You can believe something and you can also know something at the same time. For example, I believe 2 + 2 = 4. I also know that 2+2=4. I'm not certain why you think if you believe something, you cannot know it as well.
BTW, you can frequently kiss someone, and later on kill someone. Just because you kiss someone, does not mean you cannot also kill that person. Just look at Judas. Doesn't the story go that he gave Jesus a kiss, that alerted the authorities on who to arrest? With the way everything turned out, Judas literally kissed Jesus and at the same time did something that ended up killing him.

[game-protect]

@ extremely mentally ill

In the real world believe something means not knowing. And if you know something you can not believe it because believe means not knowing!

[actmyname]

Real world definitions are defined by the majority of qualified real world participants and not by singular entities!

Extremely mentally ill bitcointalk accounts are not authorized to contribute to real world definitions!

Well, since there is a majority of users who supported the flag against you, you seem to fit the definition of a high-risk individual. Moreover, since real world definitions have to be self-referential, either you are right and 60+ users are "mentally-ill" or you are wrong.

I will apply Occam's razor in this scenario and avoid your 'no true scotsman' fallacious circular reasoning.

[game-protect]

Real world definitions are defined by the majority of qualified real world participants and not by singular entities!

Extremely mentally ill bitcointalk accounts are not authorized to contribute to real world definitions!

Well, since there is a majority of users who supported the flag against you, you seem to fit the definition of a high-risk individual.

1) 66 extremely mentally ill bitcointalk accounts are the majority of what?

I am pretty sure that 66 bitcointalk accounts are a minority compared to the overall number of bitcointalk accounts.

2) 66 extremely mentally ill bitcointalk accounts confirm that they do not know that anyone dealing with Game Protect is at a high risk of losing money.

3) There are two schizophrenic parts in the bitcointalk software:

a) Warns about Game Protect even though 66 bitcointalk accounts confirm that they do not know that anyone dealing with Game Protect is at a high risk of losing money!

Maybe bitcointalk still warns about Game Protect because extremely mentally ill bitcointalk accounts confirm it and not sane bitcointalk accounts?

Maybe if sane bitcointalk accounts would not know that anyone dealing with Game Protect is at a high risk of losing money, the warning would vanish?

b) In the first sentence it says believe = opinion and in the second sentence it says it's not an opinion!

But it also does not show any facts that anyone lost money!

All in all very confusing for the majority of sane bitcointalk accounts!

[actmyname]

Unfortunately, your definitions do not fit the real-world definitions that are accepted by the majority of qualified real-world participants.

Therefore, your definition of mentally ill is null.
Therefore, your complaints about the bitcointalk flag system are null.

Therefore, this tautological self-referential system that you are using considers your responses as "opinions" and therefore false.

[game-protect]

In the real world publicly believing something without any connection to the reality is considered as extemely mentally ill by psychologists and psychiatrists!

Schizophrenia is also defined by real world psychologists and psychiatrists and not by few extemely mentally ill bitcointalk accounts!

Of course do some extremely mentally ill bitcointalk accounts believe that they define real world definitions (caused by its exteme mental illness! ) like killing is kissing, sun is moon and car is checkered, but their beliefs do not have any connection to the reality!

[TwitchySeal]

Did you receive 5% of about £12k-£13k sometime around Dec 2018 in exchange for legal help dealing with Curacao for the OP in this thread?

Did you receive 5% of about £12k-£13k sometime around Dec 2018 in exchange for legal help dealing with Curacao for the OP in this thread?

Did you receive 5% of about £12k-£13k sometime around Dec 2018 in exchange for legal help dealing with Curacao for the OP in this thread?

Fick du 5% av cirka £ 12k- £ 13k någon gång runt december 2018 i utbyte mot juridisk hjälp med att handla med Curacao för OP i den här tråden?

Did you receive 5% of about £12k-£13k sometime around Dec 2018 in exchange for legal help dealing with Curacao for the OP in this thread?

[yogg]

Schizophrenia is [...]

Thanks for the lesson, Doctor Bozo.
Please can you inform us on what selective sight is ?

Did you receive 5% of about £12k-£13k sometime around Dec 2018 in exchange for legal help dealing with Curacao for the OP in this thread?

Did you receive 5% of about £12k-£13k sometime around Dec 2018 in exchange for legal help dealing with Curacao for the OP in this thread?

Did you receive 5% of about £12k-£13k sometime around Dec 2018 in exchange for legal help dealing with Curacao for the OP in this thread?

Fick du 5% av cirka £ 12k- £ 13k någon gång runt december 2018 i utbyte mot juridisk hjälp med att handla med Curacao för OP i den här tråden?

Did you receive 5% of about £12k-£13k sometime around Dec 2018 in exchange for legal help dealing with Curacao for the OP in this thread?

1) Running a gambling website under the Curacao licence. (https://lottery.game-protect.com/)

and

2) Claiming that Curacao licence gambling sites operators are scams. (https://game-protect.com/curacao-license-scam/)

game-protect == scam

[actmyname]

killing is kissing, sun is moon and car is checkered

Why do your definitions have no link to reality? I know that some mentally-ill bitcointalk accounts believe that they can define real world definitions, but this is not the case. Rather, a collective will assimilate to the status quo in regards to a consensus of linguistic definitions.

Is the casino that you host on lottery.game-protect unlicensed?

Yes or No?

[game-protect]

Of course do some extremely mentally ill bitcointalk accounts believe that they define real world definitions (caused by its exteme mental illness! ) like killing is kissing, sun is moon and car is checkered, but their beliefs do not have any connection to the reality!

Why do extremely mentally ill bitcointalk account definitions have no link to reality?

Because they are extremely mentally ill!

[actmyname]

killing is kissing, sun is moon and car is checkered

Why do extremely mentally ill bitcointalk account definitions have no link to reality?

Because they are extremely mentally ill!

Yes, they are so mentally ill that they misquote and are unable to read size 90pt font.

[game-protect]

The biggest mistake online casino victims can do is listen to extremely mentally ill bitcointalk accounts like marlboroza!

marlboroza alleges: Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with game-protect is at a high risk of losing money, and guests would be well-advised to avoid doing so. This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and it is not based on the user's opinions.

This extremely mentally ill bitcointalk account believes that anyone dealing with game-protect is at a high risk of losing money, even though we are since 3,5 years active with over 500 online casino scam reports received and no one ever lost money while dealing with game-protect!

[TwitchySeal]

The biggest mistake online casino victims can do is listen to extremely mentally ill bitcointalk accounts like marlboroza!

marlboroza alleges: Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with game-protect is at a high risk of losing money, and guests would be well-advised to avoid doing so. This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and it is not based on the user's opinions.

This extremely mentally ill bitcointalk account believes that anyone dealing with game-protect is at a high risk of losing money, even though we are since 3,5 years active with over 500 online casino scam reports received and no one ever lost money while dealing with game-protect!

How's the fullflush case coming along, GP?

[yogg]

The biggest mistake online casino victims can do is listen to

Wait so ... If they are victims, are they eligible for your "services" ?
They don't have the "protection" because they didn't sign up through your website to enable the "protection".

I'm a bit confused here. How do you help "victims" that didn't register through your website ?

Please can you remind me again, over the couple of years here, who did you help ?
I see only one person stating that you "helped" recovering the funds.
I rather much believe you harassed a gambling site operator so they got tired of you and paid him.

[game-protect]

I'm a bit confused here. How do you help "victims" that didn't register through your website ?

What does Game Protect offer?

- Dispute resolution between you and the operators for your Game Protect qualified gaming accounts
    
- Lawyer and civil court proceeding, in case you have a valid claim and we can not reach a resolution
    
- Private investigations if operators commit offenses like embezzlement, scam and money laundering

How can I qualify?

1) Simply register your betting or gambling account with any Qualify free operator.

2) If you ignored the option 1) and got scammed, then you still have the following enforcement options:

- Collection proceedings on a no cure no pay basis, if the money owed is at least around 5,000 Euro.
    
- Donate 5% of your claim (minimum 100 Euro) in advance.
    
- Register with any Qualify free operator and accumulate affiliate commission worth 5% of your claim.

[yogg]

2) If you ignored the option 1) and got scammed, then you still have the following enforcement options:

- Collection proceedings on a no cure no pay basis, if the money owed is at least around 5,000 Euro.
    
- Donate 5% of your claim (minimum 100 Euro) in advance.

Because there is no payment BUT a donation, the victim does not pay for a service to game-protect, but donates money and hopes to see something back.

If you fail to recover a scammed amount, will you return the "donation" ?
Or do you keep this as a compensation for the work you did on the case ?

Because a victim from a scam casino can also become a "victim" of game-protect if game-protect is inneficient in recovering any money !

I trust game-protect to harass people, that he knows how to do well, but recover scammed money ?

[Astargath]

I still think Game Protect should be banned. He is spamming the forum with bullshit which should be considered trolling (against the rules). He is also abusing the trust system (Against the rules in extreme cases) and I certainly believe this is an extreme case, not that I give a shit about his trust ratings but he is clearly just a troll or fully delusional person.

[marlboroza]

The biggest mistake online casino victims can do is listen to extremely mentally ill bitcointalk accounts like marlboroza!

Thanks for bumping this thread for more visibility! Any information about fullflush case?  

~

Please don't go back to "GP's donation discussion" again, game-protect has removed all posts about this, obviously they don't want to discuss it again.