User: betnomi

It looks like @betnomi, mistakenly entered the room, he sent the PM and said to give up the red faith and add positivity to it, this is a mess to me.
It seems like me and @betnomi have never dealt with their gambling sites or project campaign and the red trust right now, which is in their belief.


Trust: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2532772



I'm a little curious about PM @betnomi.
What should I do with @betnomi account, maybe I should add a new red or just ignore it.

---

---

I saw a new accusation on their gambling site.


Topic: Betnomi 🏆 Truly Decentralized Betting/Gambling Platform 🏆

http://archive.is/wip/CxWK2

They made a new campaign and they are paying 0.0007 BTC to 50 people. I was paid.

Ofc this is not enough to prove anything... they  are accused of a very dishonest behavior, using other people' pictures in their team without authorization. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5104319.0

It is very hard to clean up a reputation once you tainted it...

The scam accusation was made over a year ago, and they even never bothered to respond to it or clear up the air. Why now?
Instead, what they did was this;



I didn't send them any negative feedback or support the type 1 flag back then but this is unprofessional and dishonest behavior by a platform which i can never trust with my money.

I received the same, and most bothering was:

I am the one who tag them first for fake team accusation. They have sent me PM as well before they start review campaign. They had tried convince me to work with them. But I just ignore their PM. But its seems they want to remove their negative feedback very quickly and offering bribe indirectly. See the last part of their message,

Does it mean if I had agreed to work with them then they was encouraged to pay me a handsome amount? Isn't like something bribe?

As like you we also want to see more bitcoin business here, but it doesn't mean we should give them opportunities once again since they have open accusation. I don't know how you consider fake team accusation as a "little thing". Why should we wait for another scammy behavior since we had encountered something similar behavior previously. Have you seen their accusation thread and have you noticed any defensive reply from them? Had you asked why they didn't defended themselves if they were legit?

However it's your personal issue either will you work with them or not but I don't think they would recover their reputation by this way. Most import questions is, if they run with fund in near future who will be responsible since they were accused previously for fake team and you are the one who promoting them on the forum?

Personally, it sounds like they were offering to compensate you if you worked with them on their campaigns. I cannot see the whole pm, but i'm not reading anything that's saying give us positive rep and we will pay you. I'm reading "we will compensate you for your work".

Do you handle other sites campaigns for free? you see an opportunity to look good and twist it to your liking?

Fair point here as far as fake team goes, but do you know what all the other gambling site owners look like? Baryom from Bitsler? Ethan from yolodice? Devans from bustabit/bustadice? Rhaver former owner of both? Dooglus from Just dice? This is not an attack on other gambling site owners, just making a small point. Coolcryptovator has a point as well. Teams that post fake pics usually have the intentions on scamming and running off.

I am not saying that posting fake team pics is a great thing to do, nor am I saying it wasn't a bad thing to do. The explanation I was given is someone who was part of the old team did all that. True? I don't know.

They are a gambling site, same as the rest. I cannot say they will not scam in the future(Dean Nolan of Betking DogeDigital/Ranlo/Altcoin LLC of moneypot as examples. not all tagged examples either). Cannot say they will or won't run off today or 5 years from now.

If they do scam you'll be able to say, well I told you so, but I'm just taking a chance that they are trying to run shit honestly. They could burn me too. If they were trying to run another ICO I would have steered clear but this is a gambling site. If Legitimate accusations pop up then all promotions cease, that has been stated.

I agree with yahoo62278 on this matter, if a project is a actually scam, when they are found out, they will definitely leave and come back with another name we can't recognize to continue the scam. But Betnomi didn't do that, they realized their wrong and had developed their project for over a year, no money was taken away from users with an ICO. No money was donated nor any money was stolen. So no matter who the team behind Betnomi is, they've done everything on their own. They invest effort and money in their website, so, why can't we give them a chance to operate transparently here? The trust cannot be proved in a day, two days or a week, but it can be proved for months, years. They rushed to text a lot of people here, but just let them know they shouldn't do it, an advice on how to work on this forum would be better than a criticism. Time will tell whether they're trustworthy or fraudsters 

I see that a lot of trusted members including yourself are now promoting Best Change, a platform that was almost giving no chance for existing at all on the forum and the first reason why they were flagged was simply because they were considered high paying (without using escrow) for a new campaign with many slots, only Royse777 most noticeably and few members were fighting that they deserve a fair (even though you might argue he wasn't being objective because he applied already) and that lead to a lot of backlash which includes you excluding Him from your trust network. So, that brings about my question what if Royse777 and just a very few members then had not voiced that Best Change also need fair chance ? That'd have been one less platform on the forum, right ?


I could not agree less with you. All it would have cost them is a new domain name, why go through this route of redemption then ?



They approach was wrong, the intention maybe not.

I had been talking to the owner of betnomi about a possible job oportunity as their CM here in the forum for the last couple of days; I was not aware of this mess of PMs, and for the whole evening, we've been going over every question raised so far together to try to answer them the best possible way. I'm not currently working for them; I'm doing this for free, mostly because I have spare time during lockdown so I'm not associated with betnomi.

Now that that has been explained, let's go point out the obvious: the owner of betnomi doesn't know how this forum works, let alone the trust/flag system. That has lead to this mess we're seeing right now. I'm not trying to justify the actions that have been taken until now by betnomi; had they hired a CM sooner, none of this would have happened, but they didn't and hare we are now. I'll first address the questions raised in this thread, and will add the explanations to the old thread too. The old thread will also be updated, but only answering the accusations raised there. All the answers I'll give are a copy-paste (with a bit of rewording in some cases) from the conversation I've had with the owner.

Before I start, I'll once again say that I'm not associated or receiving any kind of payment from betnomi; I'm acting as a middleman between a user that does not understand how this forum works and the people that are following this thread.

---

---

First of all, I'd like to apologize on behalf of the owner of betnomi for the PMs you have received. As I have already explained, the owner has little knowledge about how trust related stuff is handled in the forum. Some of you may know think that me acting as a middleman right now is not the best idea, but after everything I've talked about with the owner, I think that's the best (and maybe only) way of addressing every issue that is brought in a calm and straight way. The wording of the PMs was also something far from ideal, but there's nothing that can be done now about that.


The ICO had been cancelled and the project became a self funded one, so there was no need for an ANN. That's why it was "deleted" (edited to just show XXs). Now that the platform is re-launching, the owner wants a fresh start, and that's why he's been reaching out to the people supporting the flag and leaving the negative trust. He didn't reply back in the day because he was busy building the platform, and apart from the lack of knowledge about how the forum works, he didn't have many time to reply to these accusations. It was not the best move, but again, we can't change the past.


I'm sorry you didn't get a reply on that, it most likely went unnoticed. Here's your answer:

3 client seeds are used to generate the out come of the game and there is the possibility a user can submit his own seed which will be included in the hashing process. If a user needs to verify anything, he can use the provably fair tool on the website. If that is not enough, he can use any SHA512 Hash calculator online and will get the same result. The platform is not provided by us, but by a platform provider that has been in the businness for over 15 years. The games are created, hosted and maintained by them and we do not have access to the source code, so there's no way we can mess around with anything. Besides, the platform provider has multiple RNG certifications and gaming licences. (I've uploaded them into a PDF on Mega, in case someone wants to see them.) The product is white labbeled, and we have signed a NDA, so the numbers that could trace back to them have been redacted.

The platform provider has some default templates, and upon deciding which one you are going to use, they rebrand it for you. That's the reason behind the similarities and even some same terms between Suprabets, as mentioned in the OP.

This is indeed another case of terrible word choice in the PM, same as with

As Lauda did also point out in the other PM. Had I known he was going to be sending PMs to everybody, I'd have tried to stop it, but again, the past can't be changed. Luckily, the owner has realized that this behaviour was more damaging than helping.

---

---

Now let's get started with the old accusation. This part will be copy-pasted with a small introduction and link to this thread, to try to have a single one rather than 2.

For what I've understood, there were 2 things that lead to the scam accusation:
(copy pasted from the Open Scam accusation)

• "Abdul Rehman "UI / UX Designer", he confirmed to me by Linkedin that he did not have any links with the team, it could be a coincidence."
• "Rahul Vyas confirms that its picture and information are used without its consent"

Regarding the Abdul Rehman case:

The owner knew Abdul from past projects, and he was indeed part of the team. He was asked for his ID and a photo to be used in the team tab. There's a contrat signed too. What happened here? The name Abdul Rehman was a nickname; he had another legal name (ID provided). That could have let to a confusion with the linkeding profile; let's note that the OP had found Abdul, rather than getting linked from the website.

Part of the contract and some conversations between Abdul and the owner of betnomi---> PDF at Mega (some information has been redacted). The contract itself cannot be made public, since there is some confidential information.

Regarding the Rahul Vyas case:

As with Abdul, there's a part of the conversation between the owner and Rahul at the PDF at Mega.
As we can read, an agreement was reached, unlike what Rahul stated in the scam accusation screenshots. The owner does also say that they did indeed sign a contract. Since that would be some hard to refute evidence, I've instructed him to search for said contract. Should he find it, I'll update this post/reply on the thread. As requested by the owner, some information has been redacted (payments in this case). No payment was made in the end, because in words of the owner, Rahul asked for a higher payment after his information was published on the website (and after signing the contract). That conversation is unfortunately unavailable, and without the contract to back up the version of the owner, it'll be up to each user following the thread to believe one or the other.
I am aware about the fact that the screen names in the conversation I've uploaded on this PDF doesn't match the one the owner of betnomi has provided, but we are not going to ask for KYC, are we? It's the same person, that I can say.

---

---

I think I've replied to every issue that's been brought up here, if I skipped anything, I'm sorry; it was not my intention. I'll now update the open scam accusation thread too, and feel free to and any more concern you may have here, and I'll try to get it solved.

Edit: I've just seen that OP of the old Open scam accusation has been "deleted" after I replied there. I am puzzled by this action, as that thread served as the main reference for both the flag and the negative trust provided by most users. I've archived it in case it gets deleted.  The only reasonable scenario I can think of, is that seeing that there is a new reputation thread about the same user, OP has decided it made no sense to have both threads open. It could have been moved to the archive, so that it could still be used as a reference; but I guess only the OP,  Hellmouth42 can answer that

Sorry, it's my bad. I thought that changing your feedback was important, I thought you were ready to forgive them  but nonetheless, a neutral trust is more comfortable than a negative trust 
If they maintain everything stable in the future, I think forgiveness can be granted, right? They have chosen a harder way with their old account instead of using a new account