[SCAM] Sportsbet.io (Withholding funds) [dispute settled]

[neymarjr12]

What happened:
A month ago my account on Sportsbet.io was disabled (account login neymarjr12).
After that the support requested me to go through KYC (passport, utility bil, bank statement) - I have provided everything.
On 25 June the support asked me about the link with some accounts (dorismand, juhannoode, 300hunna and Palmik), which I have never seen in my life, and claimed that I was "multi accounting".
I replied that this is my first and only account, and that I didn't brake any rules and requested Sportsbet.io to provide evidence of their false statement.
Until now, they didn't provide any evidence (as there is none, they just illegally withhold my funds) and only replied that I can take back the initial deposit, which is way less than my winnings.

I am ready to go through any KYC procedure, I have all the screenshots of all my bets and balance, I claim one more time that the whole story is a mistake and this is my first and only account.

Scammers Profile Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=832366
Reference Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1458034.10600
Total amount in question = 0.373 BTC
Sportsbet.io wants to offer = 0.102 BTC
Amount want to scam = 0.271 BTC
Payment Method: Bitcoin
Proof of Payment:
https://bitpay.com/insight/#/BTC/mainnet/tx/8dc2d370d081deb3ed3bfc891c10bc76c1060ade0fbedf94ae9b68e8641be2a8
https://bitpay.com/insight/#/BTC/mainnet/tx/4bb73cb7d1bee28bb4718e3d2e87cbaa3a6dda8ee6e9ee464daecf3070b8c602
https://bitpay.com/insight/#/BTC/mainnet/tx/2688739502dd29b89166d17eac67a085c52b4388ed8d415936342b0f671e211f
https://bitpay.com/insight/#/BTC/mainnet/tx/5928ec184cf3b5486faa9399f6c0f77e9fcb0b5b41befb0edc0484b2a0aee29c
PM/Chat Logs:
https://ibb.co/YZ4RKDs
https://ibb.co/CwjRTMw
https://ibb.co/j5RJXRv
https://ibb.co/G0p1DHB
https://ibb.co/Fn03mTg
https://ibb.co/c2QQZbh
https://ibb.co/ZBVzTK5
Additional Notes:
Bets:
https://ibb.co/xqm4NRJ
https://ibb.co/VHS4jps
https://ibb.co/DkVmXBG
https://ibb.co/pWyKsSf
https://ibb.co/YjnqJT9
https://ibb.co/1mcBgmn
https://ibb.co/G3wVyTS

Flag created: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2171

[1715589518]

1715589518

[1715589518]

1715589518

[1715589518]

1715589518

[AB de Royse777]

On 25 June the support asked me about the link with some accounts (dorismand, juhannoode, 300hunna and Palmik), which I have never seen in my life, and claimed that I was "multi accounting".

If this is IP basis then there are very good chance for any service provider to get misled. With a VPN two user from two different corners of the world can be linked as same person because of the same IP provided by the VPN service.

I would like to know what other tools they have used to connect these accounts. Sometimes it's okay to believe a client's statement.

[actmyname]

I would like to know what other tools they have used to connect these accounts. Sometimes it's okay to believe a client's statement.

Well said. Watching this thread for more details to come out. Hopefully @sportsbet.io would like to answer.

[neymarjr12]

On 25 June the support asked me about the link with some accounts (dorismand, juhannoode, 300hunna and Palmik), which I have never seen in my life, and claimed that I was "multi accounting".

If this is IP basis then there are very good chance for any service provider to get misled. With a VPN two user from two different corners of the world can be linked as same person because of the same IP provided by the VPN service.

I would like to know what other tools they have used to connect these accounts. Sometimes it's okay to believe a client's statement.

They did not provide ANY tools/evidence/explanation they used to connect these accounts. I have absolutely nothing to do with them.

[AB de Royse777]

They did not provide ANY tools/evidence/explanation they used to connect these accounts. I have absolutely nothing to do with them.

I hope they will give an explanation now. In the meantime can we go through the following?

I have gone through the transactions. According to my finding, the following are the addresses you sent BTC:
35wT5A62xHKZGjb3NZkprHoE83FhnSzPZS 0.05000000 BTC
3FLeBipBreMbbu4VEZcixXx668bSJ511yQ 0.10000000 BTC
3PW5986JffXyfNW38rrtHxExLxFEcFLBUj 0.10000000 BTC
3NR76ssdMdesTXbSCSuj1MEZtoan3DbDEU 0.15000000 BTC

It's already 0.4 BTC

only replied that I can take back the initial deposit, which is way less than my winnings.

https://ibb.co/c2QQZbh

Your clam is:

a) 0.373 BTC
b)

which is way less than my winnings.

Here "which" means your deposit amount

But according to the blockchain links you have made a deposit total deposits of 0.4 BTC in between 2020-06-21 17:31 to 2020-06-21 18:53 blockchair.com time. What are we missing here?

[neymarjr12]

They did not provide ANY tools/evidence/explanation they used to connect these accounts. I have absolutely nothing to do with them.

I hope they will give an explanation now. In the meantime can we go through the following?

I have gone through the transactions. According to my finding, the following are the addresses you sent BTC:
35wT5A62xHKZGjb3NZkprHoE83FhnSzPZS 0.05000000 BTC
3FLeBipBreMbbu4VEZcixXx668bSJ511yQ 0.10000000 BTC
3PW5986JffXyfNW38rrtHxExLxFEcFLBUj 0.10000000 BTC
3NR76ssdMdesTXbSCSuj1MEZtoan3DbDEU 0.15000000 BTC

It's already 0.4 BTC

only replied that I can take back the initial deposit, which is way less than my winnings.

https://ibb.co/c2QQZbh

Your clam is:

a) 0.373 BTC
b)

which is way less than my winnings.

Here "which" means your deposit amount

But according to the blockchain links you have made a deposit total deposits of 0.4 BTC in between 2020-06-21 17:31 to 2020-06-21 18:53 blockchair.com time. What are we missing here?

0.373 btc is my balance after my account was disabled: https://ibb.co/c2QQZbh
The links are my deposits. I can post here all of my sportbets that were made (won and lost), minus two withdrawals before account was disabled, this will equal to 0.373btc.

[TalkStar]

0.373 btc is my balance after my account was disabled: https://ibb.co/c2QQZbh
The links are my deposits. I can post here all of my sportbets that were made (won and lost), minus two withdrawals before account was disabled, this will equal to 0.373btc.

I will suggest you to send them a PM including your topic link. You have already described all from your side and i wish they will give their explanation here soon. Till then keep patience.      

[LFC_Bitcoin]

There is no way in hell sportsbet.io would steal .373 BTC from anyone. They’re one of, if not the most trustworthy sports bookies in crypto, they sponsor Watford FC which costs them millions of £ per season. They take people on fucking all expenses paid for trips. They paid for buwaytress to go to the Club World Cup, flights, hotels & tickets in Qatar (I know this because I nearly won that fucking comp:D).

Seriously they rake in so much money yet some of you are even thinking this could be legit, fucking LOL.

I recognise some of the senior posters names in this thread & I’m shocked that a couple of you would take this newbie's word over an established bookie like sportsbet.io

There’s always fucking noob scammers on here trying to ruin the rep of good casinos.

[neymarjr12]

There is no way in hell sportsbet.io would steal .373 BTC from anyone. They’re one of, if not the most trustworthy sports bookies in crypto, they sponsor Watford FC which costs them millions of £ per season. They take people on fucking all expenses paid for trips. They paid for buwaytress to go to the Club World Cup, flights, hotels & tickets in Qatar (I know this because I nearly won that fucking comp:D).

Seriously they rake in so much money yet some of you are even thinking this could be legit, fucking LOL.

I recognise some of the senior posters names in this thread & I’m shocked that a couple of you would take this newbie's word over an established bookie like sportsbet.io

There’s always fucking noob scammers on here trying to ruin the rep of good casinos.

I have screenshots of all of my bets, all transactions, all of the e-mails with support, I wrote the whole story as it is - why then you call me a "scammer"? Because I am a newbie on bitcointalk? Very wise

[actmyname]

I recognise some of the senior posters names in this thread & I’m shocked that a couple of you would take this newbie's word over an established bookie like sportsbet.io

It's a horrible ideology if you simply assume that reputable sites are incapable of scamming users. Imagine someone plays poker, assuming that the better player won't bluff! You've created an exploitable strategy in your decision-making process: if a site does end up scamming or ripping of a user, then what happens? We still lack the true information, but you have already assumed a conclusion.

I give users the benefit of the doubt. If the casino doesn't respond to an accusation, that's a problem. Even trite accusations deserve some recognition just so that people can rationally dismiss them - a lack of skepticism can easily lead to scams.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯Call me cynical, but I'm never one to always default to trusting the casino... especially considering some of the ToS policies they slap on.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I have screenshots of all of my bets, all transactions, all of the e-mails with support, I wrote the whole story as it is - why then you call me a "scammer"? Because I am a newbie on bitcointalk? Very wise

I have no doubt that you placed winning bets, you’ve been caught out multi accounting which is against the ToS of pretty much all bookies.

Let’s wait & see, I know sportsbet.io are trustworthy, there’s no way they’d risk their impeccable rep over such peanuts.

I recognise some of the senior posters names in this thread & I’m shocked that a couple of you would take this newbie's word over an established bookie like sportsbet.io

It's a horrible ideology if you simply assume that reputable sites are incapable of scamming users. Imagine someone plays poker, assuming that the better player won't bluff! You've created an exploitable strategy in your decision-making process: if a site does end up scamming or ripping of a user, then what happens? We still lack the true information, but you have already assumed a conclusion.

I give users the benefit of the doubt. If the casino doesn't respond to an accusation, that's a problem. Even trite accusations deserve some recognition just so that people can rationally dismiss them - a lack of skepticism can easily lead to scams.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯Call me cynical, but I'm never one to always default to trusting the casino... especially considering some of the ToS policies they slap on.

Let’s wait for sportsbet.io now, they’re probably joining the dots before laying the SMACKDOWN. I just fail to believe sportsbet.io would pull something like this.

He’s supposedly been caught multi accounting.

[efialtis]

I will be watching this thread, too - just like lfc_bitcoin wrote, you wouldn't imagine a book scamming anyone for such pocket money. In addition to that, sportsbet have gained a nice reputation (there were "problems" years ago) plus I know many of the guys and can tell this is definitely not a scam operation.

Still - and this is important - while in 99% of all cases, such "newbies" are simply trying to rip off gambling operators, there are cases when they are actually right. Tbh, no matter what. you can't just make a claim (you are a multi-accounter) and hold people's money back without presenting evidence - it's as simple as that. And this is pretty much the only thing pissing me off rather often when it comes to the online gambling industry... Players (the operators' customers) will always have a hard time with operators referring to their ToS etc. while it's nearly impossible for customers to take legal action (Curacao fwiw...)

We have seen such cases before and I guess sooner or later the sportsbet guys will "present" the evidence (doesn't need to be in public obviously) or make a statement clarifying what's really going on behind the scene.

Nb. "Sportsbet's fraud team" emails to op actually sucked if you ask me and confirm what I just wrote - bring some proof so the scammer has to shut up and that's it, end of the story. Don't just refer to your ToS. I still believe they might be right but this doesn't justify to act as we see here. 

[neymarjr12]

0.373 btc is my balance after my account was disabled: https://ibb.co/c2QQZbh
The links are my deposits. I can post here all of my sportbets that were made (won and lost), minus two withdrawals before account was disabled, this will equal to 0.373btc.

I will suggest you to send them a PM including your topic link. You have already described all from your side and i wish they will give their explanation here soon. Till then keep patience.      

I did, thanks. Will wait for their explanation.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

@efialtis
You can’t believe this is the 1% case?
As someone who has worked with Sportsbet, I know you can’t believe they’d try & scam some guy over such a pittance.

I 100% believe he’s been multi accounting, hope to hear from sportsbet themselves to clarify this.

[efialtis]

@efialtis
You can’t believe this is the 1% case?
As someone who has worked with Sportsbet, I know you can’t believe they’d try & scam some guy over such a pittance.

I 100% believe he’s been multi accounting, hope to hear from sportsbet themselves to clarify this.

Nope - I really don't!

My main point though is that those emails / the behaviour / the attitude are far from ideal - in "real life" you can't just confiscate someone's money without providing proof that he broke terms and even worse, you can't just do this without having to worry about the person taking legal action against you - we are still in wild wild west when it comes to online gambling and that is why I have always been a supporter of regulation... for all sides!

On a different note - one could argue for hours about the multi-accounting thing - operators obviously don't care as long as ppl are losing...

To be clear - I absolutely trust sportsbet.io and would recommend them to anyone looking for a crypto bookie!

[neymarjr12]

@efialtis
You can’t believe this is the 1% case?
As someone who has worked with Sportsbet, I know you can’t believe they’d try & scam some guy over such a pittance.

I 100% believe he’s been multi accounting, hope to hear from sportsbet themselves to clarify this.

Well, at this point we need to wait for their reply and explanation.

[neymarjr12]

@efialtis
You can’t believe this is the 1% case?
As someone who has worked with Sportsbet, I know you can’t believe they’d try & scam some guy over such a pittance.

I 100% believe he’s been multi accounting, hope to hear from sportsbet themselves to clarify this.

Nope - I really don't!

My main point though is that those emails / the behaviour / the attitude are far from ideal - in "real life" you can't just confiscate someone's money without providing proof that he broke terms and even worse, you can't just do this without having to worry about the person taking legal action against you - we are still in wild wild west when it comes to online gambling and that is why I have always been a supporter of regulation... for all sides!

On a different note - one could argue for hours about the multi-accounting thing - operators obviously don't care as long as ppl are losing...

To be clear - I absolutely trust sportsbet.io and would recommend them to anyone looking for a crypto bookie!

That's why I started this thread, seems to be legit place to finally sort the question out.

[TalkStar]

I 100% believe he’s been multi accounting, hope to hear from sportsbet themselves to clarify this.

Sportsbet reputation is well enough and same like you no one else gonna believe that they will commit scam like this. Its really disturbing to continue with this kinda topic where most of the time thread creator don't accept his mistake but love to give entire blame to reputed platforms. They don't care to think a little bit before opening the accusation but finally everything get clear after getting real explanation from the authority.

Same like always i wish sportsbet authority will give their explanation here and OP will stop bumping this topic. 

[Trofo]

I agree with all @efialtis said on this topic.

As a long time user of Sportsbet I can't believe they would try to scam somebody for 0.4 BTC. Heck they gave more than half of that to me as a reload bonus while I was high rolling there. They are very high on my trusted pages list and probably the most trusted gambling site.

That being said I am also aware that we are in highly unregulated space and I believe service providers should be much more open in cases like this. I don't know how their multi accounting algorithm works and I even understand they can't publicly provide all info since then the scammers would have an easier time but they have to provide something. There simply has to be some sort of transparency.

Do you guys remember those Wednesday poker freerolls? There has been so much multi accounting there that it was unplayable in the early stages of tournament. I was wandering for long time what does the Sportsbet gain from promo like that and my best answer is just - a confirmation of the multi account scammers. They have great promos and multi accounting really gives edge in those promos, both against the house and against other players.

[examplens]

I agree with all @efialtis said on this topic.

As a long time user of Sportsbet I can't believe they would try to scam somebody for 0.4 BTC. Heck they gave more than half of that to me as a reload bonus while I was high rolling there. They are very high on my trusted pages list and probably the most trusted gambling site.

Don't forget that only 0.1 BTC is players money, initial deposit. Rest between 0.1 and 0.4 is profit from gambling. Also, the house wants to give the initial deposit back to him, obviously not accepting his bets and winnings.
He is already withdrawing money from Sportsbet casino, but now they are stuck there. not the first time we see users who've accused casino but at the end, they cheated his promotion.
Anyway, I don't want to defend any side there, but I did not see enough evidence that casino trying to scam someone here.

[efialtis]

I agree with all @efialtis said on this topic.

As a long time user of Sportsbet I can't believe they would try to scam somebody for 0.4 BTC. Heck they gave more than half of that to me as a reload bonus while I was high rolling there. They are very high on my trusted pages list and probably the most trusted gambling site.

Don't forget that only 0.1 BTC is players money, initial deposit. Rest between 0.1 and 0.4 is profit from gambling. Also, the house wants to give the initial deposit back to him, obviously not accepting his bets and winnings.
He is already withdrawing money from Sportsbet casino, but now they are stuck there. not the first time we see users who've accused casino but at the end, they cheated his promotion.
Anyway, I don't want to defend any side there, but I did not see enough evidence that casino trying to scam someone here.

Only 0.1 BTC is players money? Really? Because that's his deposit? Couldn't disagree more - the minute you win it, it's yours of course - that's the reason why people gamble in the first place and the business model?

[examplens]

Only 0.1 BTC is players money? Really? Because that's his deposit? Couldn't disagree more - the minute you win it, it's yours of course - that's the reason why people gamble in the first place and the business model?

apparently they are disputing the way he made the profit. If they get profit using fraud method, it’s the same as if he stole it.
I assume that all casinos have the same rule if you cheat, you can't win. Player still has the option to get his money, and will not be at a loss.

In any case, we can only to speculate, I would like to see the casino's side of the story.

[buwaytress]

Does sound like a tough case for OP but I know if he has a case, it will be listened out and there will be a conclusion, one way or other.

To all those saying Google searches are full of hits on scams, I don't disagree, but you'll find the same for any popular site. Whether or not these claims are justified, I generally believe in reputation -- not just of the one being accused, but of the accusers. In my experience, those with genuine claims will go through an arbitrator (if they're not satisfactorily handled as I'm sure SB will with OP's case). Those with no authentic claims tend to use reputation blackmail.

I'm not for blindly defending anyone, and I certainly have been a benefactor of SB so my opinion's not objective, but I'd recommend anyone who has a case and can't find a conclusion to seek a recognized arbitrator like AskGamblers to open a case. Be prepared to provide all evidence and then accept the ones against you, if any. AskGamblers is probably the most respected arbitrator in this space. Mind you, they do view SB as a highly trustworthy name in the space, as they have resolved countless cases against SB already, and found their decisions to be warranted.

[neymarjr12]

Only 0.1 BTC is players money? Really? Because that's his deposit? Couldn't disagree more - the minute you win it, it's yours of course - that's the reason why people gamble in the first place and the business model?

apparently they are disputing the way he made the profit. If they get profit using fraud method, it’s the same as if he stole it.
I assume that all casinos have the same rule if you cheat, you can't win. Player still has the option to get his money, and will not be at a loss.

In any case, we can only to speculate, I would like to see the casino's side of the story.

I made around 30 bets, on different sports, different events, live and pre-match - what kind of fraud method to get my profit do you mean?
https://ibb.co/xqm4NRJ
https://ibb.co/VHS4jps
https://ibb.co/DkVmXBG
https://ibb.co/pWyKsSf
https://ibb.co/YjnqJT9
https://ibb.co/1mcBgmn
https://ibb.co/G3wVyTS

[sportsbet.io]

Hi Guys,

This matter has been discussed on an ongoing basis between the player and our relevant Sportsbook department.

Based on the initial information we had at hand, we decided to lock the account temporarily and contact the player to ask for more information on some matters.

We have asked several questions of the player, on many different email chains. We are not confident in the credibility of the answers vs the information we have at hand.

The decision was made to keep the account closed and refund the customer the difference between the deposits and withdrawals (102mbtc)

On no less than 4 occasions we have requested the customer to provide their nominated bitcoin wallet address so we can send back the money.
these emails date back a couple of weeks, so this is not a new request.

Regardless of the player is happy with the decision of closing their account or not, this is a decision that under the circumstances will not be reversed and the player will have the same amount of money they started with.

Occasion number 5: Neymarjr12: Can you please email back your desired bitcoin wallet address so we can return you the 102 mbtc. This will be done as soon as you send the details.

Thank you for your time all.

In the interest of serving other sportsbet.io customers evenly and fairly, I won't be allocating any more time to this matter. I trust you understand.

regards,

Steve,
Sportsbet.io
(edited)

[neymarjr12]

We have asked several questions of the player, on many different email chains. We are not very confident in the credibility of the answers vs the information we have at hand.

What questions? How am I linked to some 4 random accounts? I answered - I am not linked with them, never saw this nicknames before.
What information do you have in hand? Where is the evidence?

The decision was made to keep the account closed and refund the customer their initial deposit of 102 mbtc.

Why??? What is your proof? You cannot just decide for no reason.

On no less than 4 occasions we have requested the customer to provide their nominated bitcoin wallet address so we can send back the money.
these emails date back a couple of weeks, so this is not a new request.

I confirm receiving those e-mails, wrote about 102mBtc in the thread, but I disagree with your "decision" and want all of my money back.

Regardless of the player is happy with the decision of closing their account or not, this is a decision that under the circumstances will not be reversed and the player will have the same amount of money they started with.

What circumstances?

[SyGambler]

I have seen many similar cases like this before and I do believe that most of the times the site is right .
but this truly needs to change , once a site accuses a user of multi accounting they should provide him with all the findings about the case cause it doesn't look good at all this way

please @sportsbet.io share the details whenever someone is calling you out publicly , personally I do trust the site and I have made withdrawals much bigger than the amount in this case without any single problem ( I even won in promotions alone more than the amount claimed here )

it's safer this way for both players and community , especially that most of these cases start after users are winning which can be considered a freeroll try by the site ( you lose the site takes the money , you win we give you only your deposit back )

[neymarjr12]

I 100% believe he’s been multi accounting, hope to hear from sportsbet themselves to clarify this.

Did you get the clarification?
"We are not very confident in the credibility of the answers vs the information we have at hand"
Again, no clear explanation, no evidence provided, just vague phrases.
What is your opinion?

[acroman08]

I have seen many similar cases like this before and I do believe that most of the times the site is right .
but this truly needs to change , once a site accuses a user of multi accounting they should provide him with all the findings about the case cause it doesn't look good at all this way

please @sportsbet.io share the details whenever someone is calling you out publicly , personally I do trust the site and I have made withdrawals much bigger than the amount in this case without any single problem ( I even won in promotions alone more than the amount claimed here )

I agree with this. providing the website findings against the OP regarding this case should be shown to check its legitimacy.

it's safer this way for both players and community , especially that most of these cases start after users are winning which can be considered a freeroll try by the site ( you lose the site takes the money , you win we give you only your deposit back )

sounds like a traditional casino kicking out a gambler after winning too much

[actmyname]

Based on the initial information we had at hand, we decided to lock the account temporarily and contact the player to ask for more information on some matters.

We have asked several questions of the player, on many different email chains. We are not confident in the credibility of the answers vs the information we have at hand.

The decision was made to keep the account closed and refund the customer the difference between the deposits and withdrawals (102mbtc)

I won't be allocating any more time to this matter. I trust you understand.

This lackadaisical attitude is the kind of opaque operation that I joined Bitcoin to escape. Are gamblers expected to believe, "we had information and determined he is in the wrong," when the whole situation is a conflict of interest? Players don't know if the information you used to come to that conclusion is detailed or very loose: whether it hinges on something trite like IP addresses and geolocation or something more concrete like blockchain evidence and falsified KYC.

[efialtis]

Well, I was really hoping for this situation not to end like this... And everything I previously wrote still stands - this is unacceptable (as long as we are not missing something that has already been shared with OP in private).

I am still not sure who is right or wrong but this is just not good enough and "closing" a case just like this is far from professional.

The worst thing about all of that is:

1) I still can't believe Sportsbet would go shady for such amount
2) I have never had the SLIGHTEST problem
3) I am receiving/have received almost instant withdrawals of comparable amounts in the last couple of days

We need to be fair and objective though and from player perspective, it's anything but this...

[neymarjr12]

And everything I previously wrote still stands - this is unacceptable (as long as we are not missing something that has already been shared with OP in private).

I attached almost all of the emails in the first post - there is nothing to miss.
If they would have a good reason, they would post it here already.
I think the difference between me and most of other players is that I made some quick profit and started to withdraw it - they figured out that I won more than lost and blocked my account - this is the only logic I see.

[allyouracid]

sounds like a traditional casino kicking out a gambler after winning too much

Considering the amounts they regularly deal with, this is a ridiculous thing to assume.

But still, it would be nice if sportsbet.io would share their findings. Even if it's substantiated and you do have evidence, it's not okay to just come here and say "we don't put anymore time in this matter". People have questions.

@OP: Just fyi, there's much more they can do to identify multiple accounts, going far beyond the IP address. For example, every computer has a unique timestamp (no computer clock has the exact same time as another one). Matching such timestamps alone is a good way to identify multiaccounting. But also your browser, with all its addons, extensions, operating system it runs on etc gives a quite clear fingerprint.
So, even if someone switches IP in his VPN, there is still plenty of identifiable information when visiting a website.

[Trofo]

This matter has been discussed on an ongoing basis between the player and our relevant Sportsbook department.

Based on the initial information we had at hand, we decided to lock the account temporarily and contact the player to ask for more information on some matters.

We have asked several questions of the player, on many different email chains. We are not confident in the credibility of the answers vs the information we have at hand.

This answer is simply not good enough for us - gamblers who put their trust in Sporstbet as one of the industry leaders. I still believe you are right and the OP has probably breached the rules but Sporsbet should be able to provide some if not all evidence publicly. OP has written several times that he wants Sporsbet to publish that information, isn't that enough to clear you legally from GDPR or similar laws? If it isn't provide a pdf publicly and ask the op to sign it and than provide the evidance.

Situations like this hurt Sportsbet reputation and you should have some way to provide evidence to the community. As somebody already mentioned many of us are here on the forum and using crypto as a way to escape centralized entities who do whatever they like, ie. freeze our money without explanations. I understand there is need for actions like that in cases of fraudulent behavior but handling of such cases should be transparent, after all that is one of main selling points of bitcoin.

[jeremypwr]

I think the difference between me and most of other players is that I made some quick profit and started to withdraw it - they figured out that I won more than lost and blocked my account - this is the only logic I see

People win from time to time; so I don't believe that to be relevant here...

Furthermore, whatever their methods may be for detecting multi accounting; I don't think that they would reveal their strategy on a public forum.
Cyber security is no joke; and I would imagine that Sportsbet has probably invested heavily in it.

This guy was already connected to 3 other accounts.
I don't think that Sportsbet would just make that up; but who knows?

[AB de Royse777]

@jeremypwr, I responded your PM. You are free to respond here or continue in the PM.

@sportsbet.io, Steve sportsbet will not pay 0.373 BTC is something unbelievable to think considering the image they have created in this community and the gambling industry. But this is also true that since people still trust this community, and they come here to find justice, we the users who care for the forum and the community will do our best to help them instead of blindly trusting a service or person. I hope this make sense for you. Just to let you know, for me personally sportsbet and bitcasino are two sites I will keep at the top of my recommendation list. There are no doubt about it.

Let's be fair here, what if instead of OP, it was me? Do you think you would easily convince users that I am lying? Don't you think in that case we would see some nasty fight to prove each others right? Either you would lose the battle or I would.

Question here:
If IP is your only tool to find connected account then this is very weak investigation.

If this is not only IP then pick some trusted users from this thread who already commented in here, who are not biased, doing things from a neutral position. Pick me, actmyname, Trofo, SyGambler. Share your private investigation with us and let us convinced that your investigation is right.


Edit: actmyname, Trofo, SyGambler I hope you guys will have no problem to invest some of your free time for the community if Steve actually share the methods with us.

Edit again:
I would add buwaytress too. Sorry I missed you buddy.

Also, sorry jeremypwr and LFC_Bitcoin not to considering you since I already see some biased opinion from you two. I hope you all understand what we want from this thread. It's not against sportsbet or any casino or service it's about showing us some evidence instead of asking us to believe where other party seems to make sense too.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

@Royse, I understand what you’re saying.

I just can’t see in any way, shape or form why they’d even bother with all this hassle for such a small amount if they weren’t absolutely 100% confident in what they discovered (multi accounting).

I wouldn't be surprised if Steve revokes his free all expense paid trips when the world goes back to normal.
He was planning to fly out like 10 people a few months ago before Covid; that would cost much more than .3 BTC.
Forget your free weekly .3 BTC Multi Master.  Do you think they really need to give away that much money weekly?
Fuck no they don't, but it's how they give back to our community. 

[efialtis]

@Royse, I understand what you’re saying.

I just can’t see in any way, shape or form why they’d even bother with all this hassle for such a small amount if they weren’t absolutely 100% confident in what they discovered (multi accounting).

I wouldn't be surprised if Steve revokes his free all expense paid trips when the world goes back to normal.
He was planning to fly out like 10 people a few months ago before Covid; that would cost much more than .3 BTC.
Forget your free weekly .3 BTC Multi Master.  Do you think they really need to give away that much money weekly?
Fuck no they don't, but it's how they give back to our community.  

All of that is highly appreciated, of course, by any real user of our community here and we can't thank them enough. Still, being generous most of the time does not justify what's going on here - two completely different things. Last but not least - Sportsbet's awesome promotions for our bitcointalk community are the reason why all of us have trust in them but and here is the big but - it's also not a bad move tactically, is it? I mean, would we still be discussing this if it was another operator or would we have already seen some heavy flags?

Yeah - I am repeating myself - I do not see why they would go through all of this or let me put it this way - why they are going through all of this.

The facts are:

Player X makes relatively big deposits and can wager with no problem at all
Player X wins a good amount of money
Player X wants to make a withdrawal and his account is blocked
Player X is supposedly abusing via multi-accounting and asked to go through KYC
Player X is doing full KYC
Operator states he doesn't believe Player X's story, confiscates any winnings and offers to return the deposit (for which Player X should be thankful) - all of that without providing any evidence at all
Operator states case is closed, no more statement - just like that

Yeah, no good...

[AB de Royse777]

I wouldn't be surprised if Steve revokes his free all expense paid trips when the world goes back to normal.
He was planning to fly out like 10 people a few months ago before Covid; that would cost much more than .3 BTC.
Forget your free weekly .3 BTC Multi Master.  Do you think they really need to give away that much money weekly?
Fuck no they don't, but it's how they give back to our community.  

To make it public, I was one of the guy who Steve asked. For some reason I had to pass the opportunity. In my calculation for per person it will possibly cost him around 1 BTC. I get it buddy but understand that this is not about only trusting a service or a person, it's about being fair to the accusation that was made in public, this is about the trust people put in this forum to find justice. This is about the community and this is bigger than everything else in here.

Personally if you ask me to recommend a gambling site to you or anyone - sportsbet and bitcasino is at the top of my list.

if they weren’t absolutely 100% confident in what they discovered (multi accounting).

I hope they are absolutely 100% correct but if they come up with saying that they found match with IP address then I will not accept it as absolute. Those of us who use VPN they know how it works. I would like to know what other methods they have to find a match and want to see that in this case they found a 100% match.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

My last post on this now -

Bitcasino.io & sportsbet.io are the same people. A week or two ago some guy claimed he won 171BTC on bitcasino.io, he claimed bitcasino.io locked his account & were refusing to pay him - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5260832.msg54754514#msg54754514

Any way, lots of posters were doubting bitcasino.io, thinking the guy was genuine. It turned out he was a scammer,  finding vulnerabilities in games. He was apparently well known on multiple casinos for doing the same.

Any way, we’ll see what happens but I’m 100% confident in sportsbet.io & I trust them.

Edit - Trust me, if bitcasino or sportsbet ever scammed anybody I’d remove my sig straight away. My account is worth more to me than they pay me.

[AB de Royse777]

Edit - Trust me, if bitcasino or sportsbet ever scammed anybody I’d remove my sig straight away. My account is worth more to me than they pay me.

I trust you on this buddy. Please do not take it that way. Here we are sharing our views to each others to find a common ground.

Doesn't it suck to you when you hear person X won something (it does not matter big or small), then come here and claims that a casino is not paying them because they think they are multi account but the casino does not show any proof?

(I get it that this is very sensitive to share in public and this is why I have this solution to share with few users who are trusted in the community, we need to give an answer to the user X that yes, we are convinced that you are multi account.)

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I have this solution to share with few users who are trusted in the community, we need to give an answer to the user X that yes, we are convinced that you are multi account.)

I think that’s a good idea, mate.

[neymarjr12]

This guy was already connected to 3 other accounts.
I don't think that Sportsbet would just make that up; but who knows?

Not true, until proven - I again repeat that I have no link with those accounts.
They could at least explain their point, why they link me with hose: same IP, same date of birth, something else - in my opinion they don't have any solid proof and just blocked me as an unprofitable customer for them.

[Trofo]

@LFC_Bitcoin
I agree with you that Sportsbet is very trusted bookie, never used bitcasino but I would trust them also simply by association. I believe most of us "senior" members here with first hand experience with Sportsbet would agree with this without any problems. That has earned them the right that when accusations like these come out most of us consider them false by default and that is probably correct assumption in most of the cases. But we have to allow for possibility that there is 0.1% of customers actually wrongfully accused.

If this accusation happened on a thread of some new unproven or maybe shady site. Most of us would already leave red trust on profile, Sportsbet has earned our trust and nobody did that. It didn't even cross my mind. If this was a new site they would have to defend themselves shouldn't we expect more of industry leaders and not less?

If this is not only IP then pick some trusted users from this thread who already commented in here, who are not biased, doing things from a neutral position. Pick me, actmyname, Trofo, SyGambler. Share your private investigation with us and let us convinced that your investigation is right.


Edit: actmyname, Trofo, SyGambler I hope you guys will have no problem to invest some of your free time for the community if Steve actually share the methods with us.

Edit again:
I would add buwaytress too. Sorry I missed you buddy.

I don't know if this a right approach but if both parties agree to solution like that I would be willing to donate some of my time. If we want to do it fairly we probably must have much more people on the jury. If there is only 4 of us what is stopping one of the parties to pay us under the table and make a ruling in their favor? You know the saying, everybody has a price, you just have to find it. This time the amount isn't so big but what if it was 150 BTC difference?

I still believe that best approach for stuff like this is public disclosure, available for all to see.

[efialtis]

@LFC_Bitcoin
I agree with you that Sportsbet is very trusted bookie, never used bitcasino but I would trust them also simply by association. I believe most of us "senior" members here with first hand experience with Sportsbet would agree with this without any problems. That has earned them the right that when accusations like these come out most of us consider them false by default and that is probably correct assumption in most of the cases. But we have to allow for possibility that there is 0.1% of customers actually wrongfully accused.

If this accusation happened on a thread of some new unproven or maybe shady site. Most of us would already leave red trust on profile, Sportsbet has earned our trust and nobody did that. It didn't even cross my mind. If this was a new site they would have to defend themselves shouldn't we expect more of industry leaders and not less?
~

Exactly what I am saying - couldn't agree more. Speaking of red trust, it crossed my mind and I will jump in and create a flag if we don't see a proper & professional handling of this "situation" asap - an army / hordes of related campaign participants supporting SB is not gonna change anything here (not pointed towards you lfc_bitcoin). It doesn't even matter who is right or wrong here as long as the situation is not being made clear - I still can't believe Sportsbet would do that for such peanuts. Anyway, this is no threat, no nothing but just the way things work and should work around here.

... All of that while I am turning over lots of mBTCs each and every week at Sportsbet and personally never had the slightest problem, I have always been treated extremely well - up to this day, I have always been recommending Sportsbet with no hesitation. Me being treated nicely does not mean I don't care about other player's experiences though and I am not going to keep my mouth shut for that reason.

Nb. I have already disabled Coingaming's platforms on my website until further notice.

[SyGambler]

all have fair points and personally I trust sportsbet with much more money than the case here , but this is a public forum and it has all the kind of members trusted , trolls , scammers ...etc
main point is that such issues should be solved with evidence , OP is saying that he got no answer regarding what exactly he did wrong so IMO at least he deserves to get the findings

[neymarjr12]

@jeremypwr, I responded your PM. You are free to respond here or continue in the PM.

@sportsbet.io, Steve sportsbet will not pay 0.373 BTC is something unbelievable to think considering the image they have created in this community and the gambling industry. But this is also true that since people still trust this community, and they come here to find justice, we the users who care for the forum and the community will do our best to help them instead of blindly trusting a service or person. I hope this make sense for you. Just to let you know, for me personally sportsbet and bitcasino are two sites I will keep at the top of my recommendation list. There are no doubt about it.

Let's be fair here, what if instead of OP, it was me? Do you think you would easily convince users that I am lying? Don't you think in that case we would see some nasty fight to prove each others right? Either you would lose the battle or I would.

Question here:
If IP is your only tool to find connected account then this is very weak investigation.

If this is not only IP then pick some trusted users from this thread who already commented in here, who are not biased, doing things from a neutral position. Pick me, actmyname, Trofo, SyGambler. Share your private investigation with us and let us convinced that your investigation is right.


Edit: actmyname, Trofo, SyGambler I hope you guys will have no problem to invest some of your free time for the community if Steve actually share the methods with us.

Edit again:
I would add buwaytress too. Sorry I missed you buddy.

Also, sorry jeremypwr and LFC_Bitcoin not to considering you since I already see some biased opinion from you two. I hope you all understand what we want from this thread. It's not against sportsbet or any casino or service it's about showing us some evidence instead of asking us to believe where other party seems to make sense too.

Hi @Royse777,
Still no reply from @Sportsbet.io... By being silent they just confirm that they are thieves...
Did you get any info from them by any chance?

[AB de Royse777]

Hi @Royse777,
Still no reply from @Sportsbet.io... By being silent they just confirm that they are thieves...
Did you get any info from them by any chance?

Few minutes ago I received a PM from Steve and I replied. I hope he comes up with a solution.

@neymarjr12, you need to understand that I can not do much except leaving a negative rating if things really do not satisfy with the questions raised in here by some of us. I trust sportsbet.io and believe that they will do their best to resolve this issue. This multi accounts cases really needs a better solution.

Tagging them will be the last thing I will do and I will give them enough time before doing that.

[efialtis]

@jeremypwr, I responded your PM. You are free to respond here or continue in the PM.

@sportsbet.io, Steve sportsbet will not pay 0.373 BTC is something unbelievable to think considering the image they have created in this community and the gambling industry. But this is also true that since people still trust this community, and they come here to find justice, we the users who care for the forum and the community will do our best to help them instead of blindly trusting a service or person. I hope this make sense for you. Just to let you know, for me personally sportsbet and bitcasino are two sites I will keep at the top of my recommendation list. There are no doubt about it.

Let's be fair here, what if instead of OP, it was me? Do you think you would easily convince users that I am lying? Don't you think in that case we would see some nasty fight to prove each others right? Either you would lose the battle or I would.

Question here:
If IP is your only tool to find connected account then this is very weak investigation.

If this is not only IP then pick some trusted users from this thread who already commented in here, who are not biased, doing things from a neutral position. Pick me, actmyname, Trofo, SyGambler. Share your private investigation with us and let us convinced that your investigation is right.


Edit: actmyname, Trofo, SyGambler I hope you guys will have no problem to invest some of your free time for the community if Steve actually share the methods with us.

Edit again:
I would add buwaytress too. Sorry I missed you buddy.

Also, sorry jeremypwr and LFC_Bitcoin not to considering you since I already see some biased opinion from you two. I hope you all understand what we want from this thread. It's not against sportsbet or any casino or service it's about showing us some evidence instead of asking us to believe where other party seems to make sense too.

Hi @Royse777,
Still no reply from @Sportsbet.io... By being silent they just confirm that they are thieves...
Did you get any info from them by any chance?

As Royse777 already stated there is not much we can do except for leaving negative ratings and flagging them and rest assured - I will be doing this if we don't hear back shortly. You can't just say "this is it, no more talks, we keep your money, goodbye" without providing proof if necessary - you can't do that when you are Sportsbet - a company that lots of established users here (including myself) trust blindly - we would expect that from a shit-book but not from them.

This whole situation gets frustrating since I still don't see why Sportsbet should "scam" someone for a ridiculous 0.4 BTC (ridiculous a business such as Sportsbet)...

@neymarjr12 If I understood correctly, you wouldn't mind them disclosing each and every bit (personal) information they have provided it helps the case?

[sportsbet.io]

Hi All,

Re: neymarjr12:

Our last email to neymarjr12 was sent 20/07/20 once again requesting a wallet address to return the initial deposits too. We have never ignored you and have in fact been prompt and clear in our communication.

We take any accusation extremely seriously and ignoring players is not how we resolve issues. Our history and activity on the forum speaks to that.

The simple matter of the fact here is that our Fraud Team cannot simply expose their methodology for detecting fraud for obvious reasons. When possible we try to show proof but in some cases it's not possible without giving away either sensitive information about the player or about our detection tools.

What we can say publicly is that we have a 100% match and have no doubt that this person was multi-accounting. We use many different tools and techniques in fraud and it’s not as rudimentary as IP matching as some people on the forum have expressed.

However, to be extra sure in this case we also asked this person to undergo KYC, which was not passed.

Given our findings and also our t&cs, we think it’s only fair to return 102 mBTC (deposits minus withdrawals)- something we’ve been trying to do for some time. What we don’t think is fair is to set a precedent of opening up cases publicly, infringing players’ privacy and giving out information which could help others circumvent fraud detection.

We’ve been on the forum since 2016 and since the beginning have tried to act with integrity and fairness. We're so very proud of being part of this community and for being known as a reputable sportsbook in the crypto space and therefore would never do anything to compromise that.


regards,

Steve,
Sportsbet.io

[tyKiwanuka]

~snip~

I have a few questions regarding that:

1) When do you normally check if a user is multi-accounting ? (like as soon as an account is opened, when a withdrawal is requested, at first deposit, if there is some suspicion etc.)
2) If a user is multi-accounting and constantly losing money, do you close those accounts as well ?
3) Did you ever have a case, where your detection tools proved to be wrong ?

If answering these questions reveals too much or is too delicate, then just disregard

[neymarjr12]

The simple matter of the fact here is that our Fraud Team cannot simply expose their methodology for detecting fraud for obvious reasons.

There was a truly fair option offered by @Royse777, which I totally support, do you agree with it?

However, to be extra sure in this case we also asked this person to undergo KYC, which was not passed.

What do you mean not passed I sent you my passport, my bank statement, my utility bill - what else do you need??? Moreover, I wrote that I can show show you "myself, my laptop, my working place, my house, anything you want" (please find confirmation in the screenshot: https://ibb.co/G0p1DHB) - I can do anything you need for KYC, because it is me, and this is my first and only account on the platform - how is that "not passed"? Ridiculous.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

If this guy failed KYC, it sounds like a closed case?

It’s pretty normal for reputable sportsbooks to ask for KYC in situations like this and would all yield the same results WITHOUT explaining how they use their different tools and techniques in fraud.

Correct me if I’m wrong?

[Pffrt]

Although it would be good approach to share some good clarification, it is not that good to share the strategy to detect multi accounting too. Cheaters may find a way to pass that strategy and continue multi accounting. However, the problem is casino never detects multi accounts when multi accounts created or deposit. All the times, when gamblers withdraw money, that's where casino starts the investigation. Before that if they keep losing or if they create couple of accounts, no investigation is made.
The problem should be solved. Gamblers should be passed verification in order to be eligible for gambling so that sites don't have to block account later but at the beginning.

1) When do you normally check if a user is multi-accounting ? (like as soon as an account is opened, when a withdrawal is requested, at first deposit, if there is some suspicion etc.)

[neymarjr12]

If this guy failed KYC, it sounds like a closed case?

It’s pretty normal for reputable sportsbooks to ask for KYC in situations like this and would all yield the same results WITHOUT explaining how they use their different tools and techniques in fraud.

Correct me if I’m wrong?

Did you read my reply?? I didn't "fail" anything, I provided all of the requested documents and ready to provide any more needed.
It just illustrates once again how unfair and ridiculous the platform is - they request documents for KYC / you send all of them (even more than requested) / they decide that you "failed" KYC / you ask why and claim that you can do any KYC needed - no reaction.
Correct me if I'm wrong that this sounds unfair?

[efialtis]

If this guy failed KYC, it sounds like a closed case?

It’s pretty normal for reputable sportsbooks to ask for KYC in situations like this and would all yield the same results WITHOUT explaining how they use their different tools and techniques in fraud.

Correct me if I’m wrong?

Gotta disagree here - anyone can say "your KYC failed" - how would it fail in the first place when the guy has sent each and every requested document? It failed, say for what reason it failed - "KYC failed because of X, Y, Z".

To be exact, we have not heard anything new and the situation is still as messed up as before.

[neymarjr12]

If this guy failed KYC, it sounds like a closed case?

It’s pretty normal for reputable sportsbooks to ask for KYC in situations like this and would all yield the same results WITHOUT explaining how they use their different tools and techniques in fraud.

Correct me if I’m wrong?

Gotta disagree here - anyone can say "your KYC failed" - how would it fail in the first place when the guy has sent each and every requested document? It failed, say for what reason it failed - "KYC failed because of X, Y, Z".

To be exact, we have not heard anything new and the situation is still as messed up as before.

Thanks for highlighting this up - this KYC thing actually illustrates their whole approach: even when you are ready to go through any KYC procedure possible, they still call it a "fail" and base their decision on it - sooo absurd...

[AB de Royse777]

The simple matter of the fact here is that our Fraud Team cannot simply expose their methodology for detecting fraud for obvious reasons. When possible we try to show proof but in some cases it's not possible without giving away either sensitive information about the player or about our detection tools.

Let's talk about this specific case. What is stopping you to share the sensitive information?
1. The player
2. Secret of the detection tools?


1. According to you, you are 100% sure that OP has multi account and all those accounts that you found connected and came up with same ID?
@neymarjr12: Do you give permission to sportsbet.io to share your ID with some of us privately? I will suggest to use encrypted file sharing. Here is my public key:

Code:

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
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=NUaF
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

@Steve, if you believe all those are same ID then you should not have any problem to share the IDs if OP give the permission.

2. You are asking us to trust you which is great! I said not to publicly do anything but share the things with some of us privately which means we are asking you to Trust this private team. But it seems you have no trust over us. Correct?
Asking us to trust you but not trusting us is not how mutual things work.


Sorry Steve, for me - the community is bigger than a personal friendship. I hate to do it but I am going to leave you a tag. Come up with a reliable explanation, I am waiting to remove the tag.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

If this guy failed KYC, it sounds like a closed case?

It’s pretty normal for reputable sportsbooks to ask for KYC in situations like this and would all yield the same results WITHOUT explaining how they use their different tools and techniques in fraud.

Correct me if I’m wrong?

Gotta disagree here - anyone can say "your KYC failed" - how would it fail in the first place when the guy has sent each and every requested document? It failed, say for what reason it failed - "KYC failed because of X, Y, Z".

To be exact, we have not heard anything new and the situation is still as messed up as before.

The guy failed KYC, I don’t think it’s good if Sportsbet disclose all ‘his’ personal information here? It could be anybodies personal info he maybe stole etc.

No offence intended at all but I dunno if it’s good to be giving Merit to blatant scammers
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1458034.msg54853858#msg54853858

Look at his post history and ask yourself if you think Sportsbet stole 10 mBTC from this guy. 

[efialtis]

If this guy failed KYC, it sounds like a closed case?

It’s pretty normal for reputable sportsbooks to ask for KYC in situations like this and would all yield the same results WITHOUT explaining how they use their different tools and techniques in fraud.

Correct me if I’m wrong?

Gotta disagree here - anyone can say "your KYC failed" - how would it fail in the first place when the guy has sent each and every requested document? It failed, say for what reason it failed - "KYC failed because of X, Y, Z".

To be exact, we have not heard anything new and the situation is still as messed up as before.

The guy failed KYC, I don’t think it’s good if Sportsbet disclose all ‘his’ personal information here? It could be anybodies personal info he maybe stole etc.

No offence intended at all but I dunno if it’s good to be giving Merit to blatant scammers
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1458034.msg54853858#msg54853858

Look at his post history and ask yourself if you think Sportsbet stole 10 mBTC from this guy.  

Regarding the KYC - this is ridiculous (from sportsbet) - plain and simple. You can not just tell someone you failed WITHOUT telling him why - do that in real world with regulation and see how far you will go...

Regarding that post - None taken, no worries. I also don't mean to offend anyone, I hope you guys know that but just saying it once more to be clear. Back to topic: I did not give him positive trust or anything but a merit and I am giving merit to any post I feel speaks truth and yes - that post is one of these so I disagree once again, sorry.

You know what's pretty sad? That some things - my friend found some nice words on the matter - are becoming "industry standard" in online gambling... Like accusing people of multi-accounting without providing any evidence while gladly accepting their cash as long as they lose.

[AB de Royse777]

The guy failed KYC, I don’t think it’s good if Sportsbet disclose all ‘his’ personal information here? It could be anybodies personal info he maybe stole etc.

I said not to publicly do anything but share the things with some of us privately

pick some trusted users from this thread who already commented in here, who are not biased, doing things from a neutral position.

Accessing the risk, my proposal was doing things privately. No one will ask to do these publicly. I even suggest to use PGP encrypted file sharing so that images do not need to upload in any public image hosting websites.

[neymarjr12]

The simple matter of the fact here is that our Fraud Team cannot simply expose their methodology for detecting fraud for obvious reasons. When possible we try to show proof but in some cases it's not possible without giving away either sensitive information about the player or about our detection tools.

Let's talk about this specific case. What is stopping you to share the sensitive information?
1. The player
2. Secret of the detection tools?


1. According to you, you are 100% sure that OP has multi account and all those accounts that you found connected and came up with same ID?
@neymarjr12: Do you give permission to sportsbet.io to share your ID with some of us privately? I will suggest to use encrypted file sharing. Here is my public key:

Code:

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
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=NUaF
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

@Steve, if you believe all those are same ID then you should not have any problem to share the IDs if OP give the permission.

2. You are asking us to trust you which is great! I said not to publicly do anything but share the things with some of us privately which means we are asking you to Trust this private team. But it seems you have no trust over us. Correct?
Asking us to trust you but not trusting us is not how mutual things work.


Sorry Steve, for me - the community is bigger than a personal friendship. I hate to do it but I am going to leave you a tag. Come up with a reliable explanation, I am waiting to remove the tag.

1. Of course I do give sportsbet.io this permission, no problem at all.
And I am ready to help in any way to solve the case.

[AB de Royse777]

1. Of course I do give sportsbet.io this permission, no problem at all.
And I am ready to help in any way to solve the case.

Quoted and archived

[buwaytress]

Hi guys. I hope I'm not yet another unneeded cook but I would like to reiterate my suggestion in that we request both neymarjr12 and Sportsbet to both proceed with this situation through a recognised gambling industry arbitrator -- AskGamblers.com.

@neymarjr12 Please if you haven't done so already, do open your case against them using this link: https://www.askgamblers.com/casino-complaints/

There is a tutorial there that I urge you to watch and then submit it and wait for it to appear on that same page (your complaint will register there if it meets all the requirements). Then, I would ask you to update this OP with all the information, I am more than certain Sportsbet will respond to that complaint there.

Why do this instead of involving all of us and others here?

1. As much as I respect and love many of the posters here -- I know almost all of them by name and consider them my friends and like-minded allies in gambling -- I do not think it is fair to ask you OR Sportsbet to disclose any private and confidential information. I, for one, would really not like to meddle with GDPR consequences, nor would I like anyone I know here to expose themselves to that very real, potentially litigious risk.

2. As much as I'd like to think my opinion counts (it is possibly not objective as I use Sportsbet myself), I don't think it is also fair to ask anyone to accept our unqualified observations, since none of us I believe actually work in the industry. AskGamblers is the only 3rd-party, independent arbitrator that I trust and I know many others online trust as well. THEY are qualified to intervene and mediate.

3. AskGamblers decision will carry more weight, and should be final, more so than any decision either of us individually or as a group could possibly have. Casinos know their reputation and will be eager and keen to resolve this with them, in a way that protects their method (but opening themselves to inquiry by AskGamblers), and protects the user (so neither I nor anyone on this forum can access your data). We may be able to affect trust ratings here but a flag by AskGamblers will affect trust ratings elsewhere online, arguably with wider impact.

OP, you can inform Sportsbet you are doing this, update the first post with relevant and updated information, and keep us abreast and informed.

[AB de Royse777]

@neymarjr12 Please if you haven't done so already, do open your case against them using this link: https://www.askgamblers.com/casino-complaints/

I would ask neymarjr12 to do so if he has not done it yet. As soon as, I will have a clear understanding that the issue has resolved from both sides, I will quickly remove my tag.

Sportsbet proved them right many times in the past and I hope they will do the same again. Looking forward to it.

PS: @buwaytress, I usually send 5 merits when I do but this time I am out of it :-D

[LFC_Bitcoin]

@neymarjr12 Please if you haven't done so already, do open your case against them using this link: https://www.askgamblers.com/casino-complaints/

I would ask neymarjr12 to do so if he has not done it yet. As soon as, I will have a clear understanding that the issue has resolved from both sides, I will quickly remove my tag.

Sportsbet proved them right many times in the past and I hope they will do the same again. Looking forward to it.

PS: @buwaytress, I usually send 5 merits when I do but this time I am out of it :-D

Royse bro,

buwaytress already suggested AskGamblers 2 days ago.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5263445.msg54840115#msg54840115
Archived:  http://archive.is/M4HBu

This could have been done a lot cleaner without tagging?

[AB de Royse777]

Royse bro,

buwaytress already suggested AskGamblers 2 days ago.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5263445.msg54840115#msg54840115
Archived:  http://archive.is/M4HBu

This could have been done a lot cleaner without tagging?

I hope you are not accusing me for this tag? I am aware of the suggestion proposed by buwaytress two days ago.

It was not my fault. Sportsbet still has not come with any satisfactory answer and I already mentioned several times that tagging them would be the last thing I will do. It was not easy for me. Come up with a satisfactory solution, I will remove my tag immediately when I get notified. Tagging a business or an account is not my job and I do not get fun from it.

Let me ask you a question: What would I, you and all of us do if this kind of accusation was from a random casino/sportsbook?

I personally would not think much but would tag them. Sportsbet gets a ticket because they have proved us trusted many times but sometimes it's not enough.

[Jgod]

Hi guys. I hope I'm not yet another unneeded cook but I would like to reiterate my suggestion in that we request both neymarjr12 and Sportsbet to both proceed with this situation through a recognised gambling industry arbitrator -- AskGamblers.com.

@neymarjr12 Please if you haven't done so already, do open your case against them using this link: https://www.askgamblers.com/casino-complaints/

There is a tutorial there that I urge you to watch and then submit it and wait for it to appear on that same page (your complaint will register there if it meets all the requirements). Then, I would ask you to update this OP with all the information, I am more than certain Sportsbet will respond to that complaint there.

Why do this instead of involving all of us and others here?

1. As much as I respect and love many of the posters here -- I know almost all of them by name and consider them my friends and like-minded allies in gambling -- I do not think it is fair to ask you OR Sportsbet to disclose any private and confidential information. I, for one, would really not like to meddle with GDPR consequences, nor would I like anyone I know here to expose themselves to that very real, potentially litigious risk.

2. As much as I'd like to think my opinion counts (it is possibly not objective as I use Sportsbet myself), I don't think it is also fair to ask anyone to accept our unqualified observations, since none of us I believe actually work in the industry. AskGamblers is the only 3rd-party, independent arbitrator that I trust and I know many others online trust as well. THEY are qualified to intervene and mediate.

3. AskGamblers decision will carry more weight, and should be final, more so than any decision either of us individually or as a group could possibly have. Casinos know their reputation and will be eager and keen to resolve this with them, in a way that protects their method (but opening themselves to inquiry by AskGamblers), and protects the user (so neither I nor anyone on this forum can access your data). We may be able to affect trust ratings here but a flag by AskGamblers will affect trust ratings elsewhere online, arguably with wider impact.

OP, you can inform Sportsbet you are doing this, update the first post with relevant and updated information, and keep us abreast and informed.

Agreed. Nobody in this forum needs to 'handle' this to determine who is correct.
There are recognised experienced mediators with a reputation , and OP should make use of those, if he has not already.
Anyone here taking sides will be of no use to @neymarjr12 , we all can be heavily biased based on our personal experiences, and only fair way for him to get a resolution to make use of said mediators.
Other then that its just meaningless arguments and finger pointing. Sportsbet has made it pretty clear they will not share any personal/incriminating info ( for good reason to protect their tools/identity holder),
@neymarjr12 please lodge a dispute on askgamblers,
May the righteous come out ahead

[SyGambler]

@buwaytress yeah that seems really the best thing to do since the problem now turning out it to be about KYC
they helped gamblers with nitrogen and fairlay in the past , don't remember any case with sportsbet tho but I guess they can handle it

[neymarjr12]

Hi guys. I hope I'm not yet another unneeded cook but I would like to reiterate my suggestion in that we request both neymarjr12 and Sportsbet to both proceed with this situation through a recognised gambling industry arbitrator -- AskGamblers.com.

@neymarjr12 Please if you haven't done so already, do open your case against them using this link: https://www.askgamblers.com/casino-complaints/

There is a tutorial there that I urge you to watch and then submit it and wait for it to appear on that same page (your complaint will register there if it meets all the requirements). Then, I would ask you to update this OP with all the information, I am more than certain Sportsbet will respond to that complaint there.

Why do this instead of involving all of us and others here?

1. As much as I respect and love many of the posters here -- I know almost all of them by name and consider them my friends and like-minded allies in gambling -- I do not think it is fair to ask you OR Sportsbet to disclose any private and confidential information. I, for one, would really not like to meddle with GDPR consequences, nor would I like anyone I know here to expose themselves to that very real, potentially litigious risk.

2. As much as I'd like to think my opinion counts (it is possibly not objective as I use Sportsbet myself), I don't think it is also fair to ask anyone to accept our unqualified observations, since none of us I believe actually work in the industry. AskGamblers is the only 3rd-party, independent arbitrator that I trust and I know many others online trust as well. THEY are qualified to intervene and mediate.

3. AskGamblers decision will carry more weight, and should be final, more so than any decision either of us individually or as a group could possibly have. Casinos know their reputation and will be eager and keen to resolve this with them, in a way that protects their method (but opening themselves to inquiry by AskGamblers), and protects the user (so neither I nor anyone on this forum can access your data). We may be able to affect trust ratings here but a flag by AskGamblers will affect trust ratings elsewhere online, arguably with wider impact.

OP, you can inform Sportsbet you are doing this, update the first post with relevant and updated information, and keep us abreast and informed.

Hi @buwaytress,
I submitted my complaint to AskGamblers, but unfortunately for me they said that "In a situation where terms violation is being disputed, AskGamblers Complaints Team is following a strict policy of non-intervention as we are adamant in our position that once accepted and signed, all the relevant casino and bonus terms should be followed. " - so they rejected my complaint based on it.
This is a screenshot of their full reply: https://ibb.co/s2H9pCg
I will still ask them one more time and post the link to this thread (I hope it will matter that so many people replied and raised their opinions and concerns).
If anyone has any contacts with AskGamblers or knows how to explain them that this case actually can be reviewed by them, it would be very helpful.

[SyGambler]

Hi @buwaytress,
I submitted my complaint to AskGamblers, but unfortunately for me they said that "In a situation where terms violation is being disputed, AskGamblers Complaints Team is following a strict policy of non-intervention as we are adamant in our position that once accepted and signed, all the relevant casino and bonus terms should be followed. " - so they rejected my complaint based on it.
This is a screenshot of their full reply: https://ibb.co/s2H9pCg
I will still ask them one more time and post the link to this thread (I hope it will matter that so many people replied and raised their opinions and concerns).
If anyone has any contacts with AskGamblers or knows how to explain them that this case actually can be reviewed by them, it would be very helpful.

that's kinda weird , I don't know how they can help gamblers when pretty much in all the cases the sites claim that players are breaking ToS
BTW in my last post I mentioned that there were cases related to nitrogen and fairlay with askgamblers but now I remembered that Askgamblers wasn't the site
it was SBR and they helped someone who had a lot of money stuck in Fairlay in the past , they have forums and section for complaints so maybe they can help with this particular case

[efialtis]

Royse777 is acting absolutely right by leaving negative feedback under these circumstances - even if AskGamblers had taken on the case - the responses and actions so far have not been good enough and it's 100% true that if we were talking about another bookie, their trust page would be bloody red by now.

Also - even if such a "case" is being handled outside of this forum, be it AskGamblers, SBR - that would not mean that we do not take any action here, would it? Otherwise we would have to remove negative feedback and flags from every operator with open disputes, right?

Long story short: I guess it is time for a flag shortly so this case will finally be handled the way it should, hopefully. (No, I have better things to do than randomly flagging and leaving negative feedbacks, I am not enjoying this and especially not when talking about my favorite crypto bookie) but everyone here should imagine he was in neymarjr's position...

Edit: Flag created and asking for support - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2160

[neymarjr12]

Hi @buwaytress,
I submitted my complaint to AskGamblers, but unfortunately for me they said that "In a situation where terms violation is being disputed, AskGamblers Complaints Team is following a strict policy of non-intervention as we are adamant in our position that once accepted and signed, all the relevant casino and bonus terms should be followed. " - so they rejected my complaint based on it.
This is a screenshot of their full reply: https://ibb.co/s2H9pCg
I will still ask them one more time and post the link to this thread (I hope it will matter that so many people replied and raised their opinions and concerns).
If anyone has any contacts with AskGamblers or knows how to explain them that this case actually can be reviewed by them, it would be very helpful.

that's kinda weird , I don't know how they can help gamblers when pretty much in all the cases the sites claim that players are breaking ToS
BTW in my last post I mentioned that there were cases related to nitrogen and fairlay with askgamblers but now I remembered that Askgamblers wasn't the site
it was SBR and they helped someone who had a lot of money stuck in Fairlay in the past , they have forums and section for complaints so maybe they can help with this particular case

I filed my complaint through SBR couple of days ago, they claim 3-5 business days for a reply, so should be soon.
Will check their forum later on as well.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Moved:
Responding to efialtis flag -

The sportsbet.io things recently have been claimed by newbies accused of either cheating, multi accounting or failing KYC. I don’t think we can expect sportsbet.io to tell everybody why they’ve failed KYC, what do we want, people’s home addresses & passports posted on here? It could be identity theft or anything and here we are doxing people totally unaware their dox has even been attained.

sportsbet.io paid out some dude who won a football accumulator $250,000 the other week. All these recent noob accusations are for less than 0.35BTC.

Why would they risk their reputation for essentially peanuts?

I’m going to oppose this flag, it’s totally uncalled for. You even play with sportsbet.io yourself don’t you?

That being said - while having them deactivated from my site and clearly taking position in this case, I am still using them myself (means something I guess...).

Last but not least - I really don't and won't become game-protect 2.0 lol but I made a promise when launching BTCGOSU: I want to become the most trusted bitcoin casino guide...

Edit: Yeah I do, so what? Man, I didn't think you'd be this unreasonable, pretty sad tbh...

I trust sportsbet.io, there’s no way they’d scam somebody for 0.3BTC.

Bro, you created a flag but you gamble with them (presume you trust them to pay out if you win?)
There’s always noobs trying to scam casinos & sportsbookies, multi-accounting etc on here.



Opinions are like arse holes, we all have one. No hard feeling mate, I just disagree that’s all.

Take care.

[efialtis]

Moved from my request for flag support:

The sportsbet.io things recently have been claimed by newbies accused of either cheating, multi accounting or failing KYC. I don’t think we can expect sportsbet.io to tell everybody why they’ve failed KYC, what do we want, people’s home addresses & passports posted on here? It could be identity theft or anything and here we are doxing people totally unaware their dox has even been attained.

sportsbet.io paid out some dude who won a football accumulator $250,000 the other week. All these recent noob accusations are for less than 0.35BTC.

I’m going to oppose this flag, it’s totally uncalled for. You even play with sportsbet.io yourself don’t you?

That being said - while having them deactivated from my site and clearly taking position in this case, I am still using them myself (means something I guess...).

Last but not least - I really don't and won't become game-protect 2.0 lol but I made a promise when launching BTCGOSU: I want to become the most trusted bitcoin casino guide...

This is a joke and goes to show how "trustworthy" you are man, sorry - "this is totally uncalled for"?!?!?!?! If this is uncalled, what is called?!

I couldn't care less what they paid out to anyone or not - your actions alone go to show that something is not going in the right direction here in this forum when it comes to that operator.

Seriously, I am wondering if you'd act the same if it was you in the guy's position. Still, everyone as he wishes.

Edit: Yeah I do, so what? Man, I didn't think you'd be this unreasonable, pretty sad tbh...

Bro, you created a flag but you gamble with them (presume you trust them to pay out if you win?)

I like to believe not paying me out these days wouldn't be very wise, don't you think?

[actmyname]

I trust sportsbet.io, there’s no way they’d scam somebody for 0.3BTC.

Trustworthy people should have trustworthy justification for their actions: this situation is not an example of that.

My problem is the constant "x casino is reputable" rhetoric that I see not only here but on other, similar threads. The problem with this idea is that it is a form of denying the antecedent: you are changing the principle, "if they have scammed someone, then they will be marked as scammers," to "if they are not marked as scammers, then they have not scammed someone."

Reputation does not immediately absolve someone of the possibility to commit immoral actions. It is merely the rule, not the exception: to gain reputation, you must simply refrain from shady actions. It does not mean that you are incapable of doing so.

[adam0991]

Hi guys. I hope I'm not yet another unneeded cook but I would like to reiterate my suggestion in that we request both neymarjr12 and Sportsbet to both proceed with this situation through a recognised gambling industry arbitrator -- AskGamblers.com.

@neymarjr12 Please if you haven't done so already, do open your case against them using this link: https://www.askgamblers.com/casino-complaints/

There is a tutorial there that I urge you to watch and then submit it and wait for it to appear on that same page (your complaint will register there if it meets all the requirements). Then, I would ask you to update this OP with all the information, I am more than certain Sportsbet will respond to that complaint there.

Why do this instead of involving all of us and others here?

1. As much as I respect and love many of the posters here -- I know almost all of them by name and consider them my friends and like-minded allies in gambling -- I do not think it is fair to ask you OR Sportsbet to disclose any private and confidential information. I, for one, would really not like to meddle with GDPR consequences, nor would I like anyone I know here to expose themselves to that very real, potentially litigious risk.

2. As much as I'd like to think my opinion counts (it is possibly not objective as I use Sportsbet myself), I don't think it is also fair to ask anyone to accept our unqualified observations, since none of us I believe actually work in the industry. AskGamblers is the only 3rd-party, independent arbitrator that I trust and I know many others online trust as well. THEY are qualified to intervene and mediate.

3. AskGamblers decision will carry more weight, and should be final, more so than any decision either of us individually or as a group could possibly have. Casinos know their reputation and will be eager and keen to resolve this with them, in a way that protects their method (but opening themselves to inquiry by AskGamblers), and protects the user (so neither I nor anyone on this forum can access your data). We may be able to affect trust ratings here but a flag by AskGamblers will affect trust ratings elsewhere online, arguably with wider impact.

OP, you can inform Sportsbet you are doing this, update the first post with relevant and updated information, and keep us abreast and informed.

Hi @buwaytress,
I submitted my complaint to AskGamblers, but unfortunately for me they said that "In a situation where terms violation is being disputed, AskGamblers Complaints Team is following a strict policy of non-intervention as we are adamant in our position that once accepted and signed, all the relevant casino and bonus terms should be followed. " - so they rejected my complaint based on it.
This is a screenshot of their full reply: https://ibb.co/s2H9pCg
I will still ask them one more time and post the link to this thread (I hope it will matter that so many people replied and raised their opinions and concerns).
If anyone has any contacts with AskGamblers or knows how to explain them that this case actually can be reviewed by them, it would be very helpful.

I find this very suspicious.

AskGamblers complaints system has hundreds of complaints of casinos violating their own T&Cs.. yet they decline it for this?

Coincidence that Sportsbet.io won AskGamblers casino of the year or something similar?

Sportsbet.io have a suspiciously low amount of complaints on AskGamblers system, only 4??

[AB de Royse777]

Flag supported however I would like neymarjr12 to create a flag type 3 since he is the one who lost the money.




https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;addflag=832366
Flag type 3
Link this thread as reference of the flag. Of course if you wish.

@LFC_Bitcoin, are you really not biased in your justification? You are asking us (everyone) to believe what sportsbet are saying even while we have a question mark on them now. This is not how bitcoin ideology works. #verify

PS: I believed them (sportsbet.io) blindly when there were no question marks on them.

[gosha@e-coin]

LFC_Bitcoin is working for sportsbet.io, that is one thing that is for sure. He is hired to defend them here on the forum.
I guess the rest of the squad is not active now (jeremypwr is also a worker for sportsbet.io for example)
He will also fall down at some stage.

If people have any doubts, Google "sportsbet.io scam"
There are so many people here who post they are scammed by them an post evidence on the forum (mail conversations, screenshots from transactions).
The most funny thing is that they first claim somebody was breaking the rules, and manipulated the casino game, and then want to settle.
The software is professional and could not be manipulated.
Always the same nonsense about "Breaking Terms", Double spent etc.

This company is a shame for bitcointalk and day in day out I read that people are scammed by them.
Only with a yellow card we can prevent that people are scammed.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Pipe down game-protect, don't want to get caught for ban evasion again. I’m quite certain sportsbet.io wouldn’t scam anybody, why would they, it makes no sense at all. If it’s pissing people off though, no problem I won’t post on this topic again.

Hopefully Steve provides 100% proof here which I’m sure he will.

[neymarjr12]

Flag supported however I would like neymarjr12 to create a flag type 3 since he is the one who lost the money.

https://i.imgur.com/yIXjOIh.png


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;addflag=832366
Flag type 3
Link this thread as reference of the flag. Of course if you wish.

@LFC_Bitcoin, are you really not biased in your justification? You are asking us (everyone) to believe what sportsbet are saying even while we have a question mark on them now. This is not how bitcoin ideology works. #verify

PS: I believed them (sportsbet.io) blindly when there were no question marks on them.

Did that, thanks for advice! Hope it helps...

[efialtis]

Flag supported however I would like neymarjr12 to create a flag type 3 since he is the one who lost the money.




https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;addflag=832366
Flag type 3
Link this thread as reference of the flag. Of course if you wish.

@LFC_Bitcoin, are you really not biased in your justification? You are asking us (everyone) to believe what sportsbet are saying even while we have a question mark on them now. This is not how bitcoin ideology works. #verify

PS: I believed them (sportsbet.io) blindly when there were no question marks on them.

Did that, thanks for advice! Hope it helps...

Supported! It's pretty sad to see (and also not surprising, unfortunately) some people just can't be unbiased and proving this by opposing the flags. Obviously people wearing their signature and what a coincidence it is that we now see "counter feedbacks" on SB's trust page as well... I am expecting that from random users but not from established ones - yes, everyone can and should have his own opinion but this is getting out of hand and if you don't agree - based on the facts here - don't support but opposing is bad judgement.

Edit: I am not sure if calling out all the sb participants and having them post how happy they are is helping - pretty much the opposite and underlying/confirming one of the points I made in some of my previous posts.

[buwaytress]

I'm not very free right now to write this properly but @neymarjr12 I find it quite strange also that AskGamblers rejected your complaint. I'd like to know how your complaint with SBR goes as well, like SyGambler says and I support the view: SBR is also respected in terms of mediating with bookies (although I personally have not actually met anyone who used them). I think in this case, we should accept (if the complaint is registered successfully) any decision that comes from them.

> > > But before you attempt to reopen complaints with AG or SBR, we could perhaps try and help you with wording your complaint (perhaps the wording of the request got you rejected, because from the response, it could be that they don't understand it?) so that it has a higher chance of success on your 2nd attempt? Could you hold off on doing that for now until we get SBR's decision?

@Royse777 thank you for your words and I think many appreciate what you and others are trying to do here. I know you from the Covid campaign (it is still fresh in my memory=) ) so I trust the intentions are similar. I know you named me and others as possible forum users to look into this case but I hope you agree with me as well that we cannot and should not look into this issue. This now deals with someone's (neymar's) identity and we must do all we can not to jeopardise his privacy.

@efialtis I actually agree with you here on some level. We have got to try to be as objective as possible when dealing with all these different cases. I, for one, have always tried to refrain from getting involved (I mean, we all got so much real life crap don't we!), but here I am somehow! Like you, and like others, I guess we are all so busy with real life! In the case for the flag, however, I have decided to oppose it, but not because I oppose your view, but on the very simple grounds that I believe there is at least some doubt on their guilt and there is no concret proof as I can tell on either party's guilt (In the same way I would not support a flag on neymar right now). I also agree on your point, that we, as a forum, do have a [non-obligatory] duty towards our fellow users, and this forum has, on its own, settled many a dispute. However, now we deal with someone's identity and that is something I feel is a line we are not allowed to cross -- not merely on principle but on legal grounds. Which is why I can only say that AG or SBR or some similar recognised industry mediator can settle this. If we, as a forum, have contributed towards both parties reaching a settlement on that recognised platform, then I feel we'd have done our "jobs".

Let's all keep this thread tidy and on topic so we don't derail the effort. I'm keen to see this resolved as I'm gambling there too!

[kryptqnick]

My experience with Sportsbet.io has been positive. Signature campaign payouts are always there, and I've been betting from time to time on their website with no issues. It seems irrational to me that a reputable website would scam someone. Clearly, it is not in their interest to lose reputation, customers and profits. And Sportsbet.io is ready to return the deposit (minus withdrawals) to the person who claims he was scammed. I understand why Sportsbet.io would not share how they linked the accounts as making this info public would help abusers to find new ways of breaking the rules.
It's a difficult case for sure, but it's not clear to me why neymarjr12 refuses to provide the address for the return of the deposit at least.
I also support the idea of buwaytress about using the reputable third party to close the case.

[gosha@e-coin]

My experience with Sportsbet.io has been positive. Signature campaign payouts are always there, and I've been betting from time to time on their website with no issues. It seems irrational to me that a reputable website would scam someone. Clearly, it is not in their interest to lose reputation, customers and profits. And Sportsbet.io is ready to return the deposit (minus withdrawals) to the person who claims he was scammed. I understand why Sportsbet.io would not share how they linked the accounts as making this info public would help abusers to find new ways of breaking the rules.
It's a difficult case for sure, but it's not clear to me why neymarjr12 refuses to provide the address for the return of the deposit at least.
I also support the idea of buwaytress about using the reputable third party to close the case.

You did not make any deposit on their site. You are only here to defend them.
The fact the moderators from the site are supporting sportsbet.io, says enough.

Here is the yellow card from yesterday, which was suddenly wiped away after (I suspect) a phonecall to one of the mods from bitcointalk.

[Rikafip]

Here is the yellow card from yesterday, which was suddenly wiped away after (I suspect) a phonecall to one of the mods from bitcointalk.

Both flags (Type 1 and Type 3) raised against sportsbet.io are inactive at the moment as they don't have sufficient support. That is why you probably can't see  warning anymore, it is not part of some bitcointalk conspiracy that is going on here, that's just how flag system works. If those flags get enough support, warning will be visible once again.

[efialtis]

Here is the yellow card from yesterday, which was suddenly wiped away after (I suspect) a phonecall to one of the mods from bitcointalk.

Both flags raised against sportsbet.io are inactive at the moment (they don't have sufficient support) that's why you probably can't see  warning anymore.

Yep - exactly, not sufficient support due to an army of sheep opposing - I wonder if leaving negative feedback as well as de-trusting for their (more than questionable) judgement would be appropriate?

[mindrust]

My problem is the constant "x casino is reputable" rhetoric that I see not only here but on other, similar threads. The problem with this idea is that it is a form of denying the antecedent: you are changing the principle, "if they have scammed someone, then they will be marked as scammers," to "if they are not marked as scammers, then they have not scammed someone."

It is called "selective scamming". Your playerbase becomes so big, every once in a while you get to scam 1 person and nobody will notice or give a damn about it.

I don't know if sportsbet.io are scammers, yet but If the player didn't pass the KYC test, how can sportsbet.io prove it?

By sharing his KYC documents with us? That doesn't make sense to me.

There is only two things OP can do.

1- Take his initial deposit and move on.
2- Post his KYC documents here so we can check if they are real or not.

If he goes with the option 2, and we figure out that he is the real deal, sportsbet.io would deserve a flag then.
Note to self: Never ever play on a KYC infested casino.

[dragonvslinux]

This looks like an ugly situation. Sportsbet have made it clear they won't provide any evidence of the user multi-accounting, nor will they explain why the user in question failed KYC, only to trust them that this is case. I can also very much understand users here trusting this service, if they have never had an issue with them in the past and if there aren't any other valid claims against them, but personally I prefer to verify than trust when possible, to avoid a dangerous type of precedent being set; that of immunity from providing any evidence.

I do agree it'd be very strange for Sportsbet to be scamming a user out of 0.3 btc, as it makes no sense in the broader picture. It would only be worthwhile if they were scamming small amounts of btc out of hundreds or thousands of users (instead of 30 or 300 btc out of 1 user for example), but if this was the case, you'd expect to hear a dozen complaints about it. This obviously isn't the case.

None of this really adds up and the reasoning makes very little sense, but this isn't relevant to the evidence provided. Therefore until the matter is resolved, I have added my support for the flag type 3 due to the evidence provided of contractual violation. I've however refrained from supporting the flag type 1, as I'm not convinced this means other users are at risk of losing money yet (generally speaking), as I'm willing to believe this could be a "one-off" for unknown reasons. I do however believe that a user has not been made whole. If evidence is provided that this user was multi-accounting, or as to why they failed their KYC (this easily can be done without disclosing personal information), then I will amend my support appropriately.

I'd recommend any users with a conflict of interest (such as promoters of this service) refrain from supporting/opposing this flag, for obvious reasons, mainly to avoid this thread being derailed into accusing certain users as being paid shills supporting a scam service etc. I think people's opinions from this signature campaign are very valid, but they should also abstain from voting. If there is enough opposition from non-bias DT members against this flag, then it will be inactive.  Best of luck to neymarjr12 in being made whole again.

[mindrust]

they won't provide any evidence of the user multi-accounting, nor will they explain why the user in question failed KYC, only to trust them that this is case.

And how can we know if the OP isn't lying?

[tyKiwanuka]

I can neither support nor oppose the flags.

• I don't think Sportsbet will scam anyone for this amount. There is too much at stake reputation-wise and ~0.4 BTC is nothing for such a company, which is a money printing machine in the end.
• By opening an account, you accept the T&C and I don't see where SB has violated their own T&C.
• I do understand why SB does not want to provide any proof in public, if it could harm them down the road dealing with "cheaters".
• If SB makes kind of an exception here after all the turmoil, this will open Pandoras Box, just like Stake did here imo.
• Otoh I also believe neymarjr12, when he says he has done nothing wrong. Has been very transparent and offered to do "anything"; even to have personal information published.
• Sometimes you maybe multi-account unknowingly. Like you made an account years ago, forgot about it and just opened a new one years later. Since he is being linked to 4 different accounts, I doubt this scenario though.
• IP checks or linking BTC addresses is no definite proof of multi-accounting.

I don't think a third party will be able to solve this case - at least not in favour of neymarjr12, because this would embarrass SB and their detection tools (regarding multi-accounting and KYC checks). This is something for a real court in the end, if OP wants to go that route.

[nutildah]

I wonder if leaving negative feedback as well as de-trusting for their (more than questionable) judgement would be appropriate?

Negative feedback: not appropriate.
Trust exclusion: sure, if you feel that way.

I'm not of the opinion that people should be neg trusted for opposing or supporting flags, especially if they are as murky as these ones.

I do agree it'd be very strange for Sportsbet to be scamming a user out of 0.3 btc, as it makes no sense in the broader picture.

That's why I oppose the type 1 flag... I am more ambivalent on the type 3 flag. Its his word vs. their word. Who are you going to believe? I am inclined to believe the long-standing, multi-million dollar operation.

Of course they are not perfect. This may even be a case of them generating a false positive, but they don't seem to think so, and we really don't have any evidence to suggest otherwise (other than reports from the user).

[AB de Royse777]

There is a flag for a case.
There are accusers and accused party.
There are people who are going to support and oppose the flag based on the evidences provided.

Accuser explained as much as he can and provided possible evidences to support his case and will also go further if needed with anything if he has been asked.
On the other hand the accused party is asking everyone to believe them because they have nice past history, and they are giving back (?) to the community.

Isn't this the summary of the case?

Which side you are going to take?
1. The one explained as much as he can, provided possible evidences to support his case and willing to co-operate with everyone if he has been asked
or
2. The one who is asking to believe their words because they were able to build a nice past history by investing a lot of money in this community.

If you can not take a decision from neutral ground then like a lot of the users in here (There are so many active users who are watching this but not taking any action and not even saying a word), don't support of oppose the flag. No one is going to force you to do that.

@Royse777 thank you for your words and I think many appreciate what you and others are trying to do here. I know you from the Covid campaign (it is still fresh in my memory=) ) so I trust the intentions are similar. I know you named me and others as possible forum users to look into this case but I hope you agree with me as well that we cannot and should not look into this issue. This now deals with someone's (neymar's) identity and we must do all we can not to jeopardise his privacy.

I guess we are all so busy with real life! In the case for the flag, however, I have decided to oppose it

Hey buddy, I am glad that you are not opposing nor supporting the flag anymore. I am pretty sure that you have not made up your mind yet and it's understandable.

Let's get back to the privacy thing. If someone comes to me and ask me to see his ID card, NI, passport then do you think it is jeopardizing his privacy? I am not a law student but from common sense I think it's okay as long as the he gives me his permission to look into his documents. From my observation, I think neymarjr12 is not complaining about it.

There is only two things OP can do.

1- Take his initial deposit and move on.
2- Post his KYC documents here so we can check if they are real or not.

If he goes with the option 2, and we figure out that he is the real deal, sportsbet.io would deserve a flag then.

2. I would not feel comfortable to post someone's ID in public but to some selective users. I have already proposed a private group and if this is really happens then I would suggest neymarjr12 and sportsbet.io to pick some users of their choice who they think are neutral in this case but trying to figure out the truth (not those who are blatantly supporting a case without giving any thought in it)

1. How many times we will handle cases like this that move on with the deposit because this is a multi account or any other shit without providing any satisfactory evidences?

Off-topic: When we are seeing users like swogerino, DeathAngel are opposing the flag then it's pretty clear their reasoning. Coming from the trust history page (feedback sent and received), interestingly there are not many involvements in any scam accusation topic from user DeathAngel and user swogerino , not even a word in this topic too, but they have opposed the flag. At least LFC_Bitcoin was fair - he has his opinions and debates and then made a decision. swogerino and DeathAngel do you see your interests are motivated by money here? Tell me a BIG NO!
You should be more reasonable on your supports or opposes since there are peoples who trust you in the DT network

[neymarjr12]

> > > But before you attempt to reopen complaints with AG or SBR, we could perhaps try and help you with wording your complaint (perhaps the wording of the request got you rejected, because from the response, it could be that they don't understand it?) so that it has a higher chance of success on your 2nd attempt? Could you hold off on doing that for now until we get SBR's decision?

Hi @buwaytress,
Please find below screehshots of my page on AskGamblers, I mostly copy-pasted what I wrote in the description of this thread:
https://ibb.co/SsdYnDL
https://ibb.co/bQS4FgK
https://ibb.co/8rKgtBM
https://ibb.co/WsN6gp7
Yes, I agree that it makes sense to wait for SBR's decision first.

[mindrust]

It is settled then. Pick your guys.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

It is settled then. Pick your guys.

Whoever he picks is going to have to liaise with Steve who runs the sportsbet.io account via PM or something to figure out why that KYC was rejected & how alt accounts may have been connected. Two sides to every story & all that otherwise it’s just a couple of rent-a-cops taking one side of the investigation. If it’s going to be a fair investigation you’ve got to do it properly.

Also threats of negative trust are not cool & is trust abuse. If & a big IF sportsbet have done wrong I’d appreciate some advance warning & proofs before being painted red for doing nothing wrong.

I’ve been on this forum for nearly 6 years, never done anything wrong. I will remove my sig & avatar if there is a wrong doing by sportsbet but until then let this investigation continue.

Good luck to all involved.

[neymarjr12]

I can neither support nor oppose the flags.

• I don't think Sportsbet will scam anyone for this amount. There is too much at stake reputation-wise and ~0.4 BTC is nothing for such a company, which is a money printing machine in the end.
• By opening an account, you accept the T&C and I don't see where SB has violated their own T&C.
• I do understand why SB does not want to provide any proof in public, if it could harm them down the road dealing with "cheaters".
• If SB makes kind of an exception here after all the turmoil, this will open Pandoras Box, just like Stake did here imo.
• Otoh I also believe neymarjr12, when he says he has done nothing wrong. Has been very transparent and offered to do "anything"; even to have personal information published.
• Sometimes you maybe multi-account unknowingly. Like you made an account years ago, forgot about it and just opened a new one years later. Since he is being linked to 4 different accounts, I doubt this scenario though.
• IP checks or linking BTC addresses is no definite proof of multi-accounting.

I don't think a third party will be able to solve this case - at least not in favour of neymarjr12, because this would embarrass SB and their detection tools (regarding multi-accounting and KYC checks). This is something for a real court in the end, if OP wants to go that route.

This is the last step, if nothing else works. Have been discussing my case with several lawyers from Curacao, will go that route in the end if needed.

Regarding the 4 accounts, I really saw them for the first time in my life when received an e-mail from Sportsbet, have no clue whatsoever how they "linked" me with those.

I also think that it starts to look that Sportsbet went too far to confirm that they made a mistake: imagine they (some support guy) didn't look into my KYC properly enough, made a mistake and disabled my account, after that this whole thread started and people start to talk and raise flags, I am ready to share my KYC - now they understand that the only option is to say that they are "100% sure", but cannot disclose anything - this way they try to save their reputation I guess...

[mindrust]

Good luck to all involved.

He should pick you too tbh. If his KYC documents are genuine and we all agree that they are, then sportsbet.io should explain which part of his documents isn't valid.

If his KYC documents were valid, then what was the problem?

edit: Btw I don't want to get picked. Don't pick me.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Good luck to all involved.

He should pick you too tbh. If his KYC documents are genuine and we all agree that they are, then sportsbet.io should explain which part of his documents isn't valid.

If his KYC documents were valid, then what was the problem?

edit: Btw I don't want to get picked. Don't pick me.

I would really like sportsbet.io to comment further to be honest. This whole thing is beginning to piss me off. I just don’t know where this goes from here, it looks like one persons word against another's. There isn’t much support on either flag by anybody reputable (aside from Royse & efilitis) so it seems none of the big hitters are siding with the supposed victim.

We’ll see what happens but I’m getting tired of this thread

[efialtis]

It is settled then. Pick your guys.

Whoever he picks is going to have to liaise with Steve who runs the sportsbet.io account via PM or something to figure out why that KYC was rejected & how alt accounts may have been connected. Two sides to every story & all that otherwise it’s just a couple of rent-a-cops taking one side of the investigation. If it’s going to be a fair investigation you’ve got to do it properly.

Also threats of negative trust are not cool. If & a big IF sportsbet have done wrong I’d appreciate some advance warning & proofs before being painted red for doing nothing wrong.

I’ve been on this forum for nearly 6 years, never done anything wrong. I will remove my sig & avatar if there is a wrong doing by sportsbet but until then let this investigation continue.

Good luck to all involved.

Yeah - painting red - as nutildah stated before - would be wrong, agreed. Detrusting people would not and it's common sense when people who never engage (not even in this case) oppose a flag while they (what a coincidence) wear their sigs & avatars.

As already stated multiple times before with Royse777 making it clear as well - there is a BIG WRONG in supporting anyone just because they state they have their valid reason when the other party is totally transparent and ready for anything.

Peanuts for Sportsbet aren't peanuts for everyone - what we have here is a company that is withholding someone's money stating he broke tos (multi-accounting). They ask him to do KYC, he does and that's still not good enough. You can not just take someone's money WITHOUT giving explanation / providing proof - this is no rocket science?!?!?!

Side note: Getting tired of all this mess, too... Ultimately my actions here are based on how I judge this situation - I realize it's hard for me not to get / take it personal with people I generally respect. I am not winning anything here - the opposite is happening actually. LFC_Bitcoin I'd like a beer or two...

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I messaged Steve & told him he’s going to have to do more to satisfy some people on this by the way.

Edit - Just looked, he hasn’t been online since 7am ish so he won’t have seen my PM yet.

[neymarjr12]

It is settled then. Pick your guys.

I guess it makes sense to pick the most active and reputable users in this thread, not matter if they were for/against my case (please correct my choice, I might have missed someone):
@Royse777
@LFC_Bitcoin
@efialtis
@buwaytress
@SyGambler
@actmyname
@Trofo
@gosha@e-coin

[LFC_Bitcoin]

It is settled then. Pick your guys.

I guess it makes sense to pick the most active and reputable users in this thread, not matter if they were for/against my case (please correct my choice, I might have missed someone):
@Royse777
@LFC_Bitcoin
@efialtis
@buwaytress
@SyGambler
@actmyname
@Trofo
@gosha@e-coin

The dude at the bottom is a scammer, he got banned as game-protect. Do not send him any information at all. Just so you believe me -
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5260668.msg54863330#msg54863330

To be honest I didn’t really want to say but most of the people supporting efialtis flag are suspected alts of this scumbag.

What he used to do as game-protect was charge people like yourself for supposed legal action & advice against casinos. He obviously would never get any money back.

But yeah, looking out for you here, do not send him any personal info.

[nutildah]

It is settled then. Pick your guys.

I guess it makes sense to pick the most active and reputable users in this thread, not matter if they were for/against my case (please correct my choice, I might have missed someone):
@Royse777
@LFC_Bitcoin
@efialtis
@buwaytress
@SyGambler
@actmyname
@Trofo
@gosha@e-coin

Bro. This really isn't necessary and you should be very careful who you give this info to. You might even have people pop up out of nowhere asking you for this now. The last person in your list is a bought account that is being used to stir up drama among different casinos (not just sportsbet) and probably doesn't have the best intentions in mind.

I don't understand how this is going to help. Maybe somebody is an expert at digital forensics and can verify if a document is legit or not, but then what? That doesn't necessarily disprove multi-accounting.

It's better to wait for additional clarification from Steve or another official Sportsbet rep on this situation.

I don't think Sportsbet would risk sullying their reputation on the forum for 0.3 BTC unless they strongly believed they were in the right.

[neymarjr12]

It is settled then. Pick your guys.

I guess it makes sense to pick the most active and reputable users in this thread, not matter if they were for/against my case (please correct my choice, I might have missed someone):
@Royse777
@LFC_Bitcoin
@efialtis
@buwaytress
@SyGambler
@actmyname
@Trofo
@gosha@e-coin

The dude at the bottom is a scammer, he got banned as game-protect. Do not send him any information at all. Just so you believe me -
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5260668.msg54863330#msg54863330

To be honest I didn’t really want to say but most of the people supporting efialtis flag are suspected alts of this scumbag.

What he used to do as game-protect was charge people like yourself for supposed legal action & advice against casinos. He obviously would never get any money back.

But yeah, looking out for you here, do not send him any personal info.

Thanks for heads up! Updated list:
@Royse777
@LFC_Bitcoin
@efialtis
@buwaytress
@SyGambler
@actmyname
@Trofo

[mindrust]

I don't understand how this is going to help. Maybe somebody is an expert at digital forensics and can verify if a document is legit or not, but then what? That doesn't necessarily disprove multi-accounting.

Right, we still won't be able to know if the OP was multi accounting but it will tell us something else which is,

that sportsbet.io are liars that don't accept valid KYC documents.

That means they can use KYC as a weapon > scam enabler.

[neymarjr12]

It is settled then. Pick your guys.

I guess it makes sense to pick the most active and reputable users in this thread, not matter if they were for/against my case (please correct my choice, I might have missed someone):
@Royse777
@LFC_Bitcoin
@efialtis
@buwaytress
@SyGambler
@actmyname
@Trofo
@gosha@e-coin

Bro. This really isn't necessary and you should be very careful who you give this info to. You might even have people pop up out of nowhere asking you for this now. The last person in your list is a bought account that is being used to stir up drama among different casinos (not just sportsbet) and probably doesn't have the best intentions in mind.

I don't understand how this is going to help. Maybe somebody is an expert at digital forensics and can verify if a document is legit or not, but then what? That doesn't necessarily disprove multi-accounting.

It's better to wait for additional clarification from Steve or another official Sportsbet rep on this situation.

I don't think Sportsbet would risk sullying their reputation on the forum for 0.3 BTC unless they strongly believed they were in the right.

Steve wrote that:
1) My KYC "was not passed".
2) Sportsbet requested this KYC "to be extra sure in this case", meaning that if I actually passed KYC, they would not be extra sure that I was "multi accounting".

If I prove (with the help of those people I listed) that #1 is false, then we come to a question of my "multi accounting" and how they "linked" me to those 4 accounts, that I have seen the first time in my life.

[adam0991]

It is settled then. Pick your guys.

I guess it makes sense to pick the most active and reputable users in this thread, not matter if they were for/against my case (please correct my choice, I might have missed someone):
@Royse777
@LFC_Bitcoin
@efialtis
@buwaytress
@SyGambler
@actmyname
@Trofo
@gosha@e-coin

The dude at the bottom is a scammer, he got banned as game-protect. Do not send him any information at all. Just so you believe me -
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5260668.msg54863330#msg54863330

To be honest I didn’t really want to say but most of the people supporting efialtis flag are suspected alts of this scumbag.

What he used to do as game-protect was charge people like yourself for supposed legal action & advice against casinos. He obviously would never get any money back.

But yeah, looking out for you here, do not send him any personal info.

Thanks for heads up! Updated list:
@Royse777
@LFC_Bitcoin
@efialtis
@buwaytress
@SyGambler
@actmyname
@Trofo

No offence to any of these, but I recommend you don’t share your ID out to anyone. When sharing with a company you have certain protections in place.

AskGamblers is truly your best bet, unfortunately I believe they are in bed with sportsbet.io and refused your complaint (amongst many others I imagine).

Unfortunately I am not sure what to recommend, it’s very hard to know what to do going forward, sportsbet are starting to get a very bad name. Only sportsbet can resolve this case in my opinion and provide some proof to you which indicates multi accounting. The best help these users listed above can provide you is by pressuring sportsbet into providing the proof required.

[yayayo]

Unfortunately I had to support the flag. Usually with big bookmakers / big names I do not involve myself into this, but I saw so many complaints that I felt it was a moral duty to support it.
I hope these cases with some people are solved quickly.
I can not imagine that they will scam people because they are main sponsor from Watford, but so many complaints can not be ignored, I think.

ya.ya.yo!

[ahctpacer]

OP I have few questions if you don't mind.

1. When did you create your Sportsbet.io account, what date exactly?
2. Are the deposits listed in the first post your only deposits, and what is the total amount deposited on June 21, 2020?

[neymarjr12]

OP I have few questions if you don't mind.

1. When did you create your Sportsbet.io account, what date exactly?
2. Are the deposits listed in the first post your only deposits, and what is the total amount deposited on June 21, 2020?

I don't mind, but why are you asking?

[Trofo]

Here are my 2 cents. There has been so much action in the thread in the last 24 hours or so that I can barley follow it properly but will give my best to comment what I deem important and hopefully not step on anybody toes.

First of all I still haven't supported or opposed the 2 raised flags. I can not do either of those actions with clear conscience. I have already stated that I personally trust Sportsbet with amounts greater than disputed here. On the other hand their response to this case simply hasn't been good enough and the fact that they have treated me fairly doesn't immediately imply fair treatment of others. I will hold with my decision for a while longer.

I messaged Steve & told him he’s going to have to do more to satisfy some people on this by the way.
Edit - Just looked, he hasn’t been online since 7am ish so he won’t have seen my PM yet.

This is the best route for now in my opinion. Steve is only available at the forum inside working hours on working days. I am not expecting he will see the PM before Monday. I will give Sportsbet one more chance to provide some evidence or solutions to this problem. However, if nothing gets resolved until Wednesday I will personally try to contact Steve and if that goes without reply I will have to support the flags as a way to provoke action from Sportsbet.

I believe even the strongest opponent of the flags has to admit that if this was some other bookie we would all paint that account red much sooner. Sportsbet has done great stuff for the community and that is the only reason I am still giving them time and it is simply unbelievable that they would scam somebody for amounts mentioned here.

However, I have no problem believing that somebody did an honest mistake and botched something in this case. I for one wouldn't think any less of Sportsbet if that is a case and they apologize after situation like that. Mistakes happen in every business and the way they are handled tells us much about the leadership of that business.

I guess it makes sense to pick the most active and reputable users in this thread, not matter if they were for/against my case (please correct my choice, I might have missed someone):
@Royse777
@LFC_Bitcoin
@efialtis
@buwaytress
@SyGambler
@actmyname
@Trofo
@gosha@e-coin

The dude at the bottom is a scammer, he got banned as game-protect. Do not send him any information at all.

@OP this is sound advice and I see you already excluded him from your list. That guy isn't helping your case at all. When somebody is just coming and writing basically the same stuff all over again I just put him on ignore list. I am willing to go this route if necessary but Steve/Sportsbet have also to agree to that. Otherwise it makes no sense. I would recommend to keep this as last resort, since it is never smart to send your documents to other people.


This thing has gone a bit out of the hand and I don't like the fact that some users, whose opinion I value, has decided to oppose this flags. I also don't like that flags have a wording like they do but we can't change that and we as a community have to make some sort of pressure on Sportsbet to provide us with better answer. Next time it could be one of us, or our newbie friend we just introduced to forum and Sportsbet.

My hope is that Steve will get in touch beginning of the next week and offer us satisfactory proofs of fraudulent behavior or solve the situation in the OP favor. Really don't like to get involved in cases like this 

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

1. This is unbelievable that sportsbet will scam anyone for peanuts.
2. There are enough saying from OP too to believe his story.

There must be some misunderstanding between OP and sportsbet which is causing all of these mess. I think I will wait for sportsbet to bring more info to help us making a clear mind before opposing the flag.

However, if nothing gets resolved until Wednesday I will personally try to contact Steve and if that goes without reply I will have to support the flags as a way to provoke action from Sportsbet.

It seems very hard to make this decision. I want to keep my head clear for tomorrow's poker game LOL

[dragonvslinux]

Thanks for heads up! Updated list:
@Royse777
@LFC_Bitcoin
@efialtis
@buwaytress
@SyGambler
@actmyname
@Trofo

I recommend you reduce your list. You don't to be giving 7 people your identity in a hurry. 3 should be more than enough to verify the documents.
These are the three people most engaged with this process. I'd strongly suggest you stick with them only. You do as you please though!

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Thanks for heads up! Updated list:
@Royse777
@LFC_Bitcoin
@efialtis
@buwaytress
@SyGambler
@actmyname
@Trofo

I recommend you reduce your list. You don't to be giving 7 people your identity in a hurry. 3 should be more than enough to verify the documents.
These are the three people most engaged with this process. I'd strongly suggest you stick with them only. You do as you please though!

I’m dunno how I’m qualified for making a decision on this, the other 2 guys with all respect to them are the only two (with any reputation) supporting the flags.

Not really sure where this goes from here but on second thoughts I dunno if this random poster verification on anything is going to work.

I don’t think sportsbet are going to give out sensitive information because they could get into a lot of trouble for that.
Instead, he's been advised (multiple times) to use a 3rd party arbitrator.

It’s not industry standard to involve forum members so I guess that’s the case here too. Surely it’s up to AskGamblers?

[efialtis]

The whole situation has become a big joke, a bad joke to be frank - honestly, I am shocked by various users' behavior - you know what guys, at least play it fair, so much hypocrisy really hurts!

Random people (people not involved at all) opposing flags, signature & avatar wearers, WO gang members etc. / PMing people who have not been involved in order to oppose the flag (with these people even posting in this thread they were pm'ed before realizing this is bad for the opposition's "mission" so they edit and remove the pm part - screenshots available) etc etc.

What can I say - some great ethics really when taking into account what we are debating about - a gambling operation withholding someone's money without providing evidence as to how this person supposedly broke ToS. Big fat joke... Sorry I can't trust your judgements...

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Random people (people not involved at all) opposing flags, signature & avatar wearers, WO gang members etc. / PMing people who have not been involved in order to oppose the flag (with these people even posting in this thread they were pm'ed before realizing this is bad for the opposition's "mission" so they edit and remove the pm part - screenshots available) etc etc.

This was me and it was my mistake. Sorry about that. When I realized it will not be okay then I edited that part. Honestly speaking, I trust some of the guys here and I believe they are doing everything to make things correct.

It's hard to make up minds in a case like this. I am sure I am not alone in this.

[neymarjr12]

Thanks for heads up! Updated list:
@Royse777
@LFC_Bitcoin
@efialtis
@buwaytress
@SyGambler
@actmyname
@Trofo

I recommend you reduce your list. You don't to be giving 7 people your identity in a hurry. 3 should be more than enough to verify the documents.
These are the three people most engaged with this process. I'd strongly suggest you stick with them only. You do as you please though!

I’m dunno how I’m qualified for making a decision on this, the other 2 guys with all respect to them are the only two (with any reputation) supporting the flags.

Not really sure where this goes from here but on second thoughts I dunno if this random poster verification on anything is going to work.

I don’t think sportsbet are going to give out sensitive information because they could get into a lot of trouble for that.
Instead, he's been advised (multiple times) to use a 3rd party arbitrator.

It’s not industry standard to involve forum members so I guess that’s the case here too. Surely it’s up to AskGamblers?

I already posted a reply from AskGamblers, now waiting for SBR.
The idea with forwarding you my KYC e-mails is for you to confirm that I actually did that and that Sportsbet's claims about "he didn't pass KYC" are false.
Again, I am ready to go through any necessary KYC procedure with Sportsbet if they reply.

[DireWolfM14]

I only just notice this thread and read through it, but I'm going comment just to explain why I'm opposing both flags:

Sportsbet.io is a business, and like all businesses they have the right to refuse service to anyone, without explanation.  They aren't obligated to explain themselves to neymarjr12, or any of us.  They made a business decision, and having taken the time to explain themselves in this thread should have been enough.  They didn't have to do that, and they don't owe anyone any more than that.

2. I don't mind sharing my KYC documents with a small group of trusted users in this thread if it helps to solve my case.

This whole business is really silly.  Who's to say the documents aren't stolen and have been passed around?  How would any one on neymarjr12's list be able to determine that?  @Royse777, would you accept this users documents in lieu of collateral for a loan?  If not, then they shouldn't be enough to condemn a legitimate business.

@neymarjr12, I know you've repeatedly said that you've done nothing wrong, but forgive my skepticism.  I couldn't help but notice your English is fairly good.  Are you sure you didn't violate their TOS?  Lets assume your documents are legit, are you from one of the countries highlighted below?

3.3.       You are aware that the right to access and use the website and any products there offered, may be considered illegal in certain countries. We are not able to verify the legality of service in each and every jurisdiction, consequently, you are responsible in determining whether your accessing and using our website is compliant with the applicable laws in your country and you warrant to us that gambling is not illegal in the territory where you reside.  For various legal or commercial reasons, we do not permit accounts to be opened or used by customers resident in certain jurisdictions, including the United States of America (and her dependencies, military bases and territories), Australia, United Kingdom, Estonia, Netherlands or other restricted jurisdictions ("Restricted Jurisdiction") as communicated by us from time to time. By using the Website you confirm you are not a resident in a Restricted Jurisdiction.

[owlcatz]

I feel 10 x dumber for having (re) read all this bullshit. I do what I want so fuck off OP.

[suchmoon]

~

I must admit I only skimmed through the thread so feel free to report me for shitposting if this has been already addressed... but those asking for proof from Sportsbet - what exactly are you expecting? Short of doxing the OP (or even then) I don't see how they can definitively prove that the OP is multiaccounting, particularly if we don't trust them and assume that proof can be fabricated.

For the record, I don't like "no multiple accounts" rules, I think such rules can't be fairly enforced leaving all sorts of loopholes, and there are often good reasons to have multiple accounts. Having said that, if you sign up for a service that has such rules you probably don't have much of a case if you get caught.

The other thing I have some concerns about is the amount of 0.373 BTC. Does that include the 0.1 BTC (IIRC) that Sportsbet offered to pay out?

[PrimeNumber7]

Imagine someone plays poker, assuming that the better player won't bluff!

I was under the impression that bluffing is part of a strategy playing poker.

Sportsbet.io is a business, and like all businesses they have the right to refuse service to anyone, without explanation.  They aren't obligated to explain themselves to neymarjr12, or any of us.  They made a business decision, and having taken the time to explain themselves in this thread should have been enough.  They didn't have to do that, and they don't owe anyone any more than that.

From what I can tell, Sportsbet indicated they were accepting the OP's business, and subsequently decided they would not pay out the OP's winnings after the outcome of the bets were determined. To me, this is different than refusing to do business with the OP.

@neymarjr12, I know you've repeatedly said that you've done nothing wrong, but forgive my skepticism.  I couldn't help but notice your English is fairly good.  Are you sure you didn't violate their TOS?  Lets assume your documents are legit, are you from one of the countries highlighted below?

Spotsbet has indicated they believe the OP was using multiple accounts on their platform.

My question for Sportsbet is, what harm did the OP cause in his alleged multiple accounts? Was he receiving some kind of free bets he was not entitled to on some of the accounts? Was he placing opposing bets on the same game on two accounts?

I am also curious as to how Sportsbet is going to handle the OP's alternate accounts? They indicated above they will allow the OP to withdraw the difference between what he deposited and withdrew on the account he won the coin on. Did the OP's other alleged accounts have net losses, or net winnings? Will you allow the whoever has control of the OP's other alleged accounts withdraw the difference between the amount they deposited and withdrew?

I don't know the answers to the above questions, however if Sporsbet is dudecting net winnings, but not crediting net losses back to the OP's various accounts, it would not be a very good look.

[actmyname]

Imagine someone plays poker, assuming that the better player won't bluff!

I was under the impression that bluffing is part of a strategy playing poker.

Sure, but if we want to look upon this situation as a "game" then you would have two options: scam/not scam. By assuming that a reputable player that is known not to scam (i.e. good prisoner/dove) would never scam, you are creating a strategy that is easily exploitable by those players. Now imagine using circular reasoning to posit that a reputable casino would not scam players.

[PrimeNumber7]

Imagine someone plays poker, assuming that the better player won't bluff!

I was under the impression that bluffing is part of a strategy playing poker.

Sure, but if we want to look upon this situation as a "game" then you would have two options: scam/not scam. By assuming that a reputable player that is known not to scam (i.e. good prisoner/dove) would never scam, you are creating a strategy that is easily exploitable by those players. Now imagine using circular reasoning to posit that a reputable casino would not scam players.

Yea, I get your point

An entity who receives blind trust that they will never steal from customers will end up stealing eventually.

[Little Mouse]

The other thing I have some concerns about is the amount of 0.373 BTC. Does that include the 0.1 BTC (IIRC) that Sportsbet offered to pay out?

0.373 was the balance when sportsbet closed OPs account. Sportsbet offered him 102 mBTC. You may want to read sportsbet response here if you did not- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5263445.msg54840690#msg54840690

[suchmoon]

The other thing I have some concerns about is the amount of 0.373 BTC. Does that include the 0.1 BTC (IIRC) that Sportsbet offered to pay out?

0.373 was the balance when sportsbet closed OPs account. Sportsbet offered him 102 mBTC. You may want to read sportsbet response here if you did not- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5263445.msg54840690#msg54840690

I did, thus the question since I couldn't see those amounts put together in a coherent manner to make it clear what we're talking about.

So the flag is basically invalid because the dispute is about 0.271 BTC, not 0.373 BTC as claimed in the OP. I could understand a small discrepancy but I don't think we should be supporting "written contract" flags overstated by 37%. There's probably more reason to oppose the flag than support it based on the amount alone, i.e. the claim is "at least partially false".

[DireWolfM14]

The other thing I have some concerns about is the amount of 0.373 BTC. Does that include the 0.1 BTC (IIRC) that Sportsbet offered to pay out?

0.373 was the balance when sportsbet closed OPs account. Sportsbet offered him 102 mBTC. You may want to read sportsbet response here if you did not- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5263445.msg54840690#msg54840690

I did, thus the question since I couldn't see those amounts put together in a coherent manner to make it clear what we're talking about.

So the flag is basically invalid because the dispute is about 0.271 BTC, not 0.373 BTC as claimed in the OP. I could understand a small discrepancy but I don't think we should be supporting "written contract" flags overstated by 37%. There's probably more reason to oppose the flag than support it based on the amount alone, i.e. the claim is "at least partially false".

That's my understanding as well.  The amount they offered him (which he has until now refused) is the sum of his deposits minus his withdrawals.  In effect he would be getting a full refund, and they would go about their business, quite literally.  Somehow it's not ringing the "scam alarm" to me.

[PrimeNumber7]

The amount they offered him (which he has until now refused) is the sum of his deposits minus his withdrawals.  In effect he would be getting a full refund, and they would go about their business, quite literally.  Somehow it's not ringing the "scam alarm" to me.

This is not my understanding. The OP placed bets with his deposit, that Sportsbet appeared to have accepted that turned out to be winning bets. The net winnings are excluded from what is being offered to the OP.

[DireWolfM14]

The amount they offered him (which he has until now refused) is the sum of his deposits minus his withdrawals.  In effect he would be getting a full refund, and they would go about their business, quite literally.  Somehow it's not ringing the "scam alarm" to me.

This is not my understanding. The OP placed bets with his deposit, that Sportsbet appeared to have accepted that turned out to be winning bets. The net winnings are excluded from what is being offered to the OP.

I understand that philosophy, but we don't know the whole story, and Sportsbet.io isn't obligated to disclose it.  In fact, considering what it would take to prove their suspicions to us, they are very likely obligated NOT to disclose it.

What if the OP is from the US, or another probated location?  Do you suggest they should break the law, and pay the winnings?  We don't know what evidence they have, and I'm not trusting a bitter newbie over an established business.

[notblox1]

However, to be extra sure in this case we also asked this person to undergo KYC, which was not passed.

Steve said that KYC provided by OP was not passed, and he is not willing to share more details.
I wonder if we can share some basic information like OP country of residence and why they refused his KYC application.
Maybe they can have Live video session with him.

For now I will not support or oppose flag as I have my suspicions after reading all and looking at images that OP provided.

[PrimeNumber7]

The amount they offered him (which he has until now refused) is the sum of his deposits minus his withdrawals.  In effect he would be getting a full refund, and they would go about their business, quite literally.  Somehow it's not ringing the "scam alarm" to me.

This is not my understanding. The OP placed bets with his deposit, that Sportsbet appeared to have accepted that turned out to be winning bets. The net winnings are excluded from what is being offered to the OP.

I understand that philosophy, but we don't know the whole story, and Sportsbet.io isn't obligated to disclose it.  In fact, considering what it would take to prove their suspicions to us, they are very likely obligated NOT to disclose it.

What if the OP is from the US, or another probated location?  Do you suggest they should break the law, and pay the winnings?  We don't know what evidence they have, and I'm not trusting a bitter newbie over an established business.

I would be willing to give Sportsbet the benefit of the doubt that the OP was multi-accounting. It is not clear if this was an innocent mistake on the part of the OP (for example creating an account in 2017 when he wanted to bet on the outcome of a game, and forgetting about it), or if the multiple accounts the OP allegedly had actually caused Sportsbet some type of harm. This is why I posed the below questions above:

My question for Sportsbet is, what harm did the OP cause in his alleged multiple accounts? Was he receiving some kind of free bets he was not entitled to on some of the accounts? Was he placing opposing bets on the same game on two accounts?

I am also curious as to how Sportsbet is going to handle the OP's alternate accounts? They indicated above they will allow the OP to withdraw the difference between what he deposited and withdrew on the account he won the coin on. Did the OP's other alleged accounts have net losses, or net winnings? Will you allow the whoever has control of the OP's other alleged accounts withdraw the difference between the amount they deposited and withdrew?

I don't know the answers to the above questions, however if Sporsbet is dudecting net winnings, but not crediting net losses back to the OP's various accounts, it would not be a very good look.

As far as I am aware, Sportsbet has not articulated the harm the OP caused in having alledged multiple accounts.

Sportsbet has not alleged the OP is from a 'prohibited location' and as such, my assumption is this is not the case.

[Little Mouse]

Somehow it's not ringing the "scam alarm" to me.

May be not.
When you join sportsbet(any site), you are making an agreement with the site. You also have some implied agreement.
Direct agreement with the site- Terms and Conditions of sportsbet
Implied agreement- Sportsbet will not scam me, they will be fair, they will send me withdraw as faster as possible etc etc and showing a cause to an accusation against you also because you know sportsbet is not like some other so called casino. So, with many other implied agreement, I would say transparency of the site is another.
If you only being accused of multi accounting but there is no proof of how you are connected to other accounts will be kind of breaking an agreement in my opinion.
Anyway, the scam thing seems to be controversial here. Looking for more explanation from sportsbet. They must be transparent.
Couple of weeks ago when a guy claimed to win 171 BTC in bitcasino, many people supported, congratulated him. But when bitcasino shared all the information with greater transparency, everyone trusted them and there was no more question.

[dragonvslinux]

So the flag is basically invalid because the dispute is about 0.271 BTC, not 0.373 BTC as claimed in the OP. I could understand a small discrepancy but I don't think we should be supporting "written contract" flags overstated by 37%. There's probably more reason to oppose the flag than support it based on the amount alone, i.e. the claim is "at least partially false".

Damn, you're right. Forgot about the offering for a third of it. Point well made, support withdrawn for the type 3 until post is corrected.

I must admit I only skimmed through the thread so feel free to report me for shitposting if this has been already addressed... but those asking for proof from Sportsbet - what exactly are you expecting? Short of doxing the OP (or even then) I don't see how they can definitively prove that the OP is multiaccounting, particularly if we don't trust them and assume that proof can be fabricated.

Sportsbet.io should still privately to the client or even publicly state why the client failed the KYC procedure, while protecting the clients privacy, as they have done so previously:

Why did the Client fail the KYC procedure?
[details]

Let the KYC from third-parties happen. Ideally via PGP though.

[suchmoon]

Sportsbet.io should still privately to the client or even publicly state why the client failed the KYC procedure, while protecting the clients privacy, as they have done so previously:

I don't know if that really can prove or disprove multi-accounting. The client can be a jerk about it and say Sportsbet is lying even if the proof is correct. It's not something that can be verified independently (e.g. on the blockchain) so basically in order to use is as proof you have to trust Sportsbet anyway.

[mindrust]

What is the point of asking for KYC if they are not going to approve them? (Assuming his docs are legit)

The way I see it they couldn't find any other way out and weaponizing KYC which is a flag deserving behavior.

They have the right to refuse service but that's not how you do it. Be straight.

If they had done all those without asking for KYC it would have been ok then. By asking for KYC they gave the OP a false hope. (violated the contract > flag) Because they weren't going to accept his documents anyway. (Again, assuming his docs were real and he is not lying)

Wouldn't you be mad if your own KYC had failed and they refused to tell you why? I would.

*
I have sent my KYC documents to binance before. I scanned them an old ass driving license and they refused. They told me that the guy in my selfie photo and my driving license photo don't look alike.   (many years between the two shots)  Valid reason. I accepted their reasoning even though I think they both me. I don't know what would have happened if I decided to send them my actual passport scan but at least I know where I failed in the first step, because they explained it to me.

[neymarjr12]

This whole business is really silly.  Who's to say the documents aren't stolen and have been passed around?  How would any one on neymarjr12's list be able to determine that?  @Royse777, would you accept this users documents in lieu of collateral for a loan?  If not, then they shouldn't be enough to condemn a legitimate business.

I can do video confirmation, I can get my documents verified by the notary - is good enough for you to determine that my documents are not stolen and not passed around?

@neymarjr12, I know you've repeatedly said that you've done nothing wrong, but forgive my skepticism.  I couldn't help but notice your English is fairly good.  Are you sure you didn't violate their TOS?  Lets assume your documents are legit, are you from one of the countries highlighted below?

No, I am not from a Restricted Jurisdiction, and it is so funny that you base your skepticism (I guess, you can't come up with anything else to support your advertiser) on a level of written English  I'm using a translator if you are interested, so it is not fairly good at all.

[mindrust]

This is livecoin all over again.

[AB de Royse777]

Information about detecting multi-accounts are easily available online. There are no such hidden technology. I have done some study since it seems I am heavily involved in this case.
1. Programmable tools/methods/studies:
- IP Addresses
- HTTP Referrer
- Cookies & Tracking Scripts
- Super Cookies. Example https://samy.pl/evercookie/
- User Agent
- Browser Fingerprinting. Example https://panopticlick.eff.org/
Ref: https://www.howtogeek.com/115483/htg-explains-learn-how-websites-are-tracking-you-online/

But all have their weakness. So one can not be 100% sure if someone is multi-accounting. Here is a good read: https://superuser.com/questions/1036422/how-can-a-website-recognise-a-multiple-account-usage

As you have noted, all of these methods have one main drawback: they are a PITA for people legitimately sharing computers and other devices. If you're designing a service that relies on users having only one account, then instead of preventing multi-accounts, design it in such a way that makes having multiple accounts pointless. This site is one example of such service: people gain reputation for doing things that are beneficial for the community. Newly created account has low reputation and is severely limited. As it gets reputation points, some capabilities are unlocked (eg. commenting everywhere) and user gets some bonuses (limited ads).

I am really interested to know what determines sportsbet that OP is multi accounting, and they are 100% sure. I do not find a rocket science method/study except the above mentioned references.

2. Then we have KYC which needs human involvements (with automated image reading/scanning and cross-checking with the central database provided by the authority like they do when we pass immigration)
An online KYC involves, cross-referencing name, address, city and other details using ID card (driving license, passport), utility bills, bank statements etc.

I am really interested to know which information of the KYC determines that OP is multi accounting and KYC isn't passed?

3. Then we have blockchain evidences and other payment systems. We can track the deposit/withdrawal references for both blockchain and traditional methods.

Weeks ago there was a case against bitcasino and Karl came up with some solid information that was undeniable so it was accepted by most of us without further questioning. What happened in this case?

Sportsbet.io should still privately to the client or even publicly state why the client failed the KYC procedure, while protecting the clients privacy, as they have done so previously:

I don't know if that really can prove or disprove multi-accounting. The client can be a jerk about it and say Sportsbet is lying even if the proof is correct. It's not something that can be verified independently (e.g. on the blockchain) so basically in order to use is as proof you have to trust Sportsbet anyway.

Would we say the same if this was fairly new sportsbook or if the claim came up from a very well established forum member?
What would we do if some reputable members who play poker regularly in SwC files a similar case against a reputable bookie? Which side we will trust?

This is livecoin all over again.

Livecoin failed to be transparent or a user failed to bring enough proof?

[mindrust]

This is livecoin all over again.

Livecoin failed to be transparent or a user failed to bring enough proof?

I believe it was similar. See it yourself if you have free time.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5159692.0
http://archive.is/T2iN8

A tldr-like post of mine from that topic:

I don't understand why is livecoin making a big fuss. Unlock his account, Give his money back, problem solved and everybody is happy. What's so hard about it? Did he steal anything from the exchange? Is his money originating from hackers/terrorists? If that's a "no" then unlock his account.

Also you can't just silence people by weaponizing your ToS, that's not what ToS is for.

I get it, it is there to protect the exchange but what about the customer?

I also must add, livecoin was a fine exchange up until that one incident. Things didn't go well only with one guy and they got painted bloody red all over, flagged, tarred and feathered. We will see how this one will go.
(I removed my support for their flag as soon as they made izoom whole again -they did, didn't they?-, but they still flash red. Apparently, once a criminal always a criminal the others think)


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=462136

[kryptqnick]

My experience with Sportsbet.io has been positive. Signature campaign payouts are always there, and I've been betting from time to time on their website with no issues. It seems irrational to me that a reputable website would scam someone. Clearly, it is not in their interest to lose reputation, customers and profits. And Sportsbet.io is ready to return the deposit (minus withdrawals) to the person who claims he was scammed. I understand why Sportsbet.io would not share how they linked the accounts as making this info public would help abusers to find new ways of breaking the rules.
It's a difficult case for sure, but it's not clear to me why neymarjr12 refuses to provide the address for the return of the deposit at least.
I also support the idea of buwaytress about using the reputable third party to close the case.

You did not make any deposit on their site. You are only here to defend them.
The fact the moderators from the site are supporting sportsbet.io, says enough.

I honestly don't know why you are so sure that I am lying about my betting on this website occasionally since this kind of information is verifiable, and it won't look nice that you were just claiming something with no evidence. So as a matter of fact, I did make deposits there.

I don't think that scamming is okay and would not work for a company that is scamming people. It's just morally wrong. I do continue to support them now because I really don't think that they would scam someone. If this was some huge jackpot, I would understand why a company would want not to pay it out (this happened with Betcoin.ag a while ago). But regardless of moral traits of the owners (I do believe they're good people for my own reasons, but it's important for the sake of the argument to show that even if one is not inclined to believe that, Sportsbet still wouldn't want to scam a person), refusing to pay out such a small (on a scale of a casino's financial operations) amount of money is impractical, as the loss of reputation would result in financial losses that are seriously bigger than less than 0.4 BTC we're talking about here.  So for this reason I think it makes sense to give them the presumption of innocence in this case.

[tyKiwanuka]

Are you sure you didn't violate their TOS?  Lets assume your documents are legit, are you from one of the countries highlighted below?

(...) including the United States of America (and her dependencies, military bases and territories), Australia, United Kingdom, Estonia, Netherlands or other restricted jurisdictions ("Restricted Jurisdiction") as communicated by us from time to time. By using the Website you confirm you are not a resident in a Restricted Jurisdiction.

Although OP already confirmed not residing in a restricted jurisdictions, I would like to say a few words about this. Bookmakers always use these terms to their advantage - all bookmakers. These rules are only enforced in case of dispute (about withdrawals) and the bookie always wins

If OP was actually from US and got (only) his deposit back after SB found out, this is technically ok. But then again, if OP lost some of his deposit and then SB finds out, that he is from a restricted jurisdiction, he will not get his (full) deposit back. So this rule only ever works one way to the advantage of the bookie. They will take money from losing players, even if they were not allowed to play on their site and can bully people with their T&C when winning.

Sportsbet knows that some of their customers (who are active in this forum) are from UK or Netherlands - do they block their accounts ? No. Do these users knowingly violate the terms of Sportsbet ? Yes.

Afterall this a weird and often times shady business, but something we have to live with to a certain extent and as I said, it's the same everywhere and not only at Sportsbet. And we can always choose to not be part of it, it's not mandatory to gamble fortunately

If $3,644 is a small amount for you then you're living in a different planet.

It's peanuts for Sportsbet And the reason, why I don't think this is some sort of a scam.

[actmyname]

Bookmakers always use these terms to their advantage - all bookmakers. These rules are only enforced in case of dispute (about withdrawals) and the bookie always wins

Yeah, and when you look at rules like this:

"6.2. If you do not use your account which has deposited funds in it, for 3 months you will receive a notice from us. If you do not use your deposits within 1 month following our notice, we reserve the right to deduct monthly administrative costs from the deposits remaining In your account. The administrative cost is 15% monthly from the deposited funds remaining in your account."
"6.3. We reserve the right to close player accounts that have been inactive for more than 12 months. In case your account has deposited funds after the 12-month inactive period, we reserve the right to use the remaining deposited funds for administrative costs for closing the account."
"9.3.      We reserve the right to apply a wagering requirement of at least 5 (five) times the deposit amount if we suspect the user in using our service as a mixer."
"12.2.    If you use a Deposit Bonus, no withdrawal of your original deposit will be accepted before you have reached the requirements stipulated under the terms and conditions of the Deposit Bonus."

Well...

[Get-Paid.com]

It's peanuts for Sportsbet And the reason, why I don't think this is some sort of a scam.

Quote:
It's peanuts for Sportsbet And and the(that is the) reason why I don't think this is some sort of a scam.

-------

Good for you if you don't think it's a scam. Fortunately many good forum members here don't ask for your opinion.
The amount is not a factor.
It's the behavior towards the customer that determines whether the site is legit or not.

Clearly, they selectively decided to block his account and now they're doing their utmost to protect their stance because any other stance would shed bad light on their operation.

Just call it for what it is without trying to be an s.

[suchmoon]

I believe it was similar. See it yourself if you have free time.

It's not similar at all. Livecoin confiscated user's full balance, not just winnings. Their TOS had a predatory clause about complaints (although this could be considered a matter of opinion). They failed to maintain and update their wallets, suffered losses (XMR and MONA), and forced users to pay for it. Had Sportsbet done something like this I'd have no problem supporting the flag.

I also must add, livecoin was a fine exchange up until that one incident. Things didn't go well only with one guy and they got painted bloody red all over, flagged, tarred and feathered. We will see how this one will go.

Again possibly a matter of opinion, but it wasn't a fine exchange. They had wallets disabled with no plan to ever re-enable them but allowed trading. This would be similar if Sportsbet could be proven to deliberately allow bets they don't intend to pay out but I don't see that here.

[neymarjr12]

Clearly, they selectively decided to block his account and now they're doing their utmost to protect their stance because any other stance would shed bad light on their operation.

Exactly, that's my point: looks like Sportsbet made a mistake with my KYC assessment (there is not a single explanation how I could not "pass it"), decided to disable my account because of this mistake and now went too far to protect their false decision.
@sportsbet.io I am totally fine to go again through any KYC needed in order to sort this thing out.

[mindrust]

It's not similar at all. Livecoin confiscated user's full balance, not just winnings. Their TOS had a predatory clause about complaints (although this could be considered a matter of opinion). They failed to maintain and update their wallets, suffered losses (XMR and

What difference does it make if neymarjr here won his money fair and square? After he won his bets, that's his money. Not the casino's.

If I were in his shoes, I wouldn't make the issue this big, I would take my initial deposit and move on but I perfectly understand why he decided to push it further.

Had Sportsbet done something like this I'd have no problem supporting the flag.

Again possibly a matter of opinion, but it wasn't a fine exchange. They had wallets disabled with no plan to ever re-enable them but allowed trading.

I didn't see massive or any serious scam accusations for that exchange. They were fine because they didn't have any negative trust ratings or flags before. I didn't mean it like their customer support or their UI was fine or shit. And they resolved the issue between izoom and them, right? Then I don't see why they are still flagged.

This would be similar if Sportsbet could be proven to deliberately allow bets they don't intend to pay out but I don't see that here.

Let's see what do we have here:

1- Sportsbet.io, accuses NeymarJr of multiaccounting without providing any proof, then asked for his KYC documents.
2- Sportsbet.io, denies his KYC documents because we don't know why. Again, no valid reason.

3- NeymarJr here is ready to share any kind of information including his private data with the beautiful and trusted users of this forum and even ready to make a video conference.

I think OP's claim looks valid.

I'd say, with the information we got in our hands, Sportsbet.io should make him whole.

[suchmoon]

3- NeymarJr here is ready to share any kind of information including his private data with the beautiful trusted users of this forum and even ready to make a video conference.

That can't disprove multi-accounting.

Personally I have serious doubts about the OP's credibility due to some stuff that was said in this thread (some not even directly related to the claim) so I would stay far away from any video conference or anything else that the OP insists on. It seems like a straw man and possibly a trap for "trusted users" to vouch for something they can't properly verify.

If Sportsbet chooses to share their findings with a trusted member that'd be great but I won't take the absence of that as proof that the OP is right.

[mindrust]

3- NeymarJr here is ready to share any kind of information including his private data with the beautiful trusted users of this forum and even ready to make a video conference.

That can't disprove multi-accounting.

How do you prove multi-accounting? How did sportsbet.io come to this conclusion? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[marlboroza]

1) When do you normally check if a user is multi-accounting ? (like as soon as an account is opened, when a withdrawal is requested, at first deposit, if there is some suspicion etc.)

It's usually done when player wins something (speaking in general).

2) If a user is multi-accounting and constantly losing money, do you close those accounts as well ?

Don't be silly. From all complains I saw (speaking in general again), I figured out that it is OK to have multiaccounts as long as you are losing.

3) Did you ever have a case, where your detection tools proved to be wrong ?

Interesting question. You know what, two years ago one gambling site accused me of having another account and they banned me. I explained them it is not me, I asked them which proofs they have (IIRC I asked them that few times) and I actually never got answer. They unbanned me shortly after conversation but I am still so fucking curious about connection and ban reason, so, when I see gambling site claiming someone is cheating I just want to see those proofs.

[suchmoon]

3- NeymarJr here is ready to share any kind of information including his private data with the beautiful trusted users of this forum and even ready to make a video conference.

That can't disprove multi-accounting.

How do you prove multi-accounting? How did sportsbet.io come to this conclusion? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You can't prove it with 100% certainty either (there's always the brother/sister/spouse/mother/dog/goat excuse) so the whole exercise is quite pointless. All we can do is try to audit Sportsbet's multi-account detection by demanding proof from them but since that has privacy implications and it wouldn't convince anyone who thinks that Sportsbet is lying (faking the proof) - I don't really see much use for that.

[mindrust]

You can't prove it with 100% certainty either (there's always the brother/sister/spouse/mother/dog/goat excuse) so the whole exercise is quite pointless. All we can do is try to audit Sportsbet's multi-account detection by demanding proof from them but since that has privacy implications and it wouldn't convince anyone who thinks that Sportsbet is lying (faking the proof) - I don't really see much use for that.

What's wrong with multiaccounting anyway?

Like it has been said above, they don't give a fuck about it while the player is losing his bets. To me it is just another weaponized ToS item.

edit: Alright, I get the freebies angle.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

What's wrong with multiaccounting anyway?

Multi-accounting enables people to get giveaways & free bets etc multiple times. I’m pretty sure people could cheat at stuff like the poker nights they have. You could be playing with 5 or 6 accounts & clean up? I’ve seen people moaning about it before.

[Get-Paid.com]

Multi-accounting enables people to get giveaways & free bets etc multiple times. I’m pretty sure people could cheat at stuff like the poker nights they have. You could be playing with 5 or 6 accounts & clean up? I’ve seen people moaning about it before.

Agreed.
It's becoming a grey area where no one can be proven fully guilty or innocent - if the user would have bet in poker or claiming bonuses then surely he should be banned and that's the end of story - but if he genuinely placed genuine bets (over/under soccer) and didn't try to cheat or circumvent the system (like he claims) then surely there's gotta be a leeway here, or at least some proper settlement - they can both keep it anonymous and don't share how they settle it but leaving the case unsettled and the OP is not willing to accept their offer of getting only his deposit back - then without Sportsbet.io taking any step further - they would only hurt their reputation short and long term.

The best thing to do in such things is common sense, and common sense says a settlement is required (or alternatively posting proofs which seems to be difficult).

[marlboroza]

You can't prove it with 100% certainty either (there's always the brother/sister/spouse/mother/dog/goat excuse) so the whole exercise is quite pointless. All we can do is try to audit Sportsbet's multi-account detection by demanding proof from them but since that has privacy implications and it wouldn't convince anyone who thinks that Sportsbet is lying (faking the proof) - I don't really see much use for that.

I didn't check their ToS lately. Do they have "one account per IP/houshold" rule?

Multi-accounting enables people to get giveaways & free bets etc multiple times. I’m pretty sure people could cheat at stuff like the poker nights they have. You could be playing with 5 or 6 accounts & clean up? I’ve seen people moaning about it before.

Was this the case here? How is that they didn't spot multi accounts before player won, but as soon as they start withdrawing...."peanuts", SB investigated account? Oh, wait, never mind 

[ahctpacer]

I can post here all of my sportbets that were made (won and lost), minus two withdrawals before account was disabled, this will equal to 0.373btc

How many successful withdrawals did you have on 06/22/2020, the day your account was temporarily locked?

https://imgbb.com/c2QQZbh

If this screenshot is genuine, you have 241 mbtc withdrawal, followed immediately by 241 mbtc deposit, why deposit back the exact same amount?

[mindrust]

Was this the case here? How is that they didn't spot multi accounts before player won, but as soon as they start withdrawing...."peanuts", SB investigated account? Oh, wait, never mind 

He must have ruined the fuck outta them with 4 accounts.

[fentanyl08]

My experience with Sportsbet.io has been positive. Signature campaign payouts are always there, and I've been betting from time to time on their website with no issues. It seems irrational to me that a reputable website would scam someone. Clearly, it is not in their interest to lose reputation, customers and profits. And Sportsbet.io is ready to return the deposit (minus withdrawals) to the person who claims he was scammed. I understand why Sportsbet.io would not share how they linked the accounts as making this info public would help abusers to find new ways of breaking the rules.
It's a difficult case for sure, but it's not clear to me why neymarjr12 refuses to provide the address for the return of the deposit at least.
I also support the idea of buwaytress about using the reputable third party to close the case.

You did not make any deposit on their site. You are only here to defend them.
The fact the moderators from the site are supporting sportsbet.io, says enough.

Here is the yellow card from yesterday, which was suddenly wiped away after (I suspect) a phonecall to one of the mods from bitcointalk.

This forum has become a disgrace to Satoshi's memory. I can't believe the management of so-called official bitcoin forum has sold itself to a casino.

[tranthidung]

I didn't check their ToS lately. Do they have "one account per IP/houshold" rule?

I only found these rules on the casino but they need to show evidence of abuse/ fraud to the OP to close the accusation and protect their reputation.

It is off-topic but last month I see many scam accusations on casinos. What happened? Is this a coincidence? Cloudbet, Sportsbet.io, Bitcasino.io, PlayBetr.com as I know they are all trusted casinos. 

3.5.      You are allowed to have only one Member Account. If you attempt to open more than one Member Account, all of your accounts may be blocked, suspended or closed and any funds credited to your account/s will be frozen.
3.6.      If you notice that you have more than one registered Member Account you must notify us immediately. Failure to do so may lead to your Member Account being blocked.
12.6.    Bonuses can only be received once per person/account, family, household, address, e-mail address, IP addresses and environments where computers are shared (university, fraternity, school, public library, workplace, etc.). The Operator reserves the right to close your account and confiscate any existing funds if evidence of abuse/fraud is found.

[mindrust]

This forum ...

Fentanyl is one helluva drug. Definitely something GP would use. I wonder how many alts you got.

[suchmoon]

This forum has become a disgrace to Satoshi's memory. I can't believe the management of so-called official bitcoin forum has sold itself to a casino.

Stop listening to game-protect and start learning how the flag system works.

What happened? Is this a coincidence?

If I were a cynical old fart I would certainly point out a completely random coincidence with game-protect's trolling using a bunch of sockpuppets.

[mindrust]

Does anybody know who that guy is posting almost only in sportsbet.io threads and opposed the flag without saying a word?

rohang

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Does anybody know who that guy is posting almost only in sportsbet.io threads and opposed the flag without saying a word?

rohang

In fairness dude who the hell are most of the people supporting the flag, Royse & efialtis fair enough.

How about these?

baxterx (1 post) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2804614
humaxx - (5 posts) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2829863
adam0991 - (7 posts) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2828445
drexlas - (16 posts) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2804172
gosha@e-coin  (game-protect) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=409314
VanityWallets2015 (suspected game-protect alt) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=435792

Take a look here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5260668.msg54863330#msg54863330

[Pffrt]

Does anybody know who that guy is posting almost only in sportsbet.io threads and opposed the flag without saying a word?

rohang

And a random member guy who have sent ever first feedback in the forum (counter of a negative to sportsbet) have been promoted to DT member. On the other hand, me with 6 sent feedbacks yet to be a DT member.

[mindrust]

Does anybody know who that guy is posting almost only in sportsbet.io threads and opposed the flag without saying a word?

rohang

In fairness dude who the hell are most of the people supporting the flag, Royse & efialtis fair enough.

How about these?

baxterx (1 post) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2804614
humaxx - (5 posts) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2829863
adam0991 - (7 posts) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2828445
drexlas - (16 posts) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2804172
gosha@e-coin  (game-protect) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=409314
VanityWallets2015 (suspected game-protect alt) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=435792

None of these are DT members. Their votes are pretty much worthless. I wondered who that is, that's all. His vote affects was affecting the flag's status since he is was a DT member and I haven't seen him before.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

mindrust, dude if DT members feel the flags are worth supporting I’m sure they will. Until then don’t get bent out of shape by it. Life is too short
 

[Pffrt]

None of these are DT members. Their votes are pretty much worthless. I wondered who that is, that's all. His vote affects was affecting the flag's status since he is was a DT member and I haven't seen him before.

I was surprised to see that guy DT and now OFF DT. May be LoyceV can who was playing with rohang DT and OFF DT? I have noticed that from other thread in reputation shared by marlboroza. When I checked the user, I learnr that he only sent that one feedback in his forum journey.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

I was surprised to see that guy DT and now OFF DT. May be LoyceV can who was playing with rohang DT and OFF DT? I have noticed that from other thread in reputation shared by marlboroza. When I checked the user, I learnr that he only sent that one feedback in his forum journey.

I had him in my trust settings, I took him off because I cba with all the moaning. Going to go through my trust list later & really condense it, this whole saga is tiring, wish I didn’t get involved. There are two flags, if people think sportsbet are scammers they’d get a red flag & their business would be over. There’s a reason people aren't supporting them, they don’t think sportsbet would scam for such little money.

Both flags are here - If you feel the urge to participate, go ahead. Neither one has anywhere near enough DT support to be live.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=832366;page=iflags

[mindrust]

mindrust, dude if DT members feel the flags are worth supporting I’m sure they will. Until then don’t get bent out of shape by it. Life is too short
 

I am neither supporting nor opposing the flag, yet. I am just making observations.  I am a good observer. I learned it at the WALL.

[suchmoon]

May be LoyceV can who was playing with rohang DT and OFF DT?

Oh come on, LoyceV, really?

https://bpip.org/TrustLog

Lots of fallout from this debacle over the last few days. I have a hard time believing that some of these users genuinely distrust each other.

[Side chain]

Both flags are here - If you feel the urge to participate, go ahead. Neither one has anywhere near enough DT support to be live.

Because you are making sure that the opposed users stay in DT or become DT to look this/these flag/s bad. More...

https://bpip.org/TrustLog

Lots of fallout from this debacle over the last few days. I have a hard time believing that some of these users genuinely distrust each other.

And every time you will find LFC_Bitcoin takes action after his competition makes a selection or deselection. And lots of new entrusts from LFC_Bitcoin only who are opposing this flag or already opposed the flag. Timestamp makes it very clear.

[rohang]

Does anybody know who that guy is posting almost only in sportsbet.io threads and opposed the flag without saying a word?

rohang

What do you mean who i am ?
Who  are you?
Everyone opposed/supported due to what they thought and their personal opinions.
I did the same, i dont see anyone saying anything why they opposed it under the flag, is that even possible?
Why even single me out? Cuz im not a regular poster or some legendary user like you? I am sorry my life doesnt allow me time for online forums and sit on keyboard all day. I like to follow sportsbet promos etc and thats why i am only active there.

I have no input on the case , and its irrelevant. Everyone posting here cant make sportsbet pay, and u all are delusional if you think you can.
I dont think they are scamming due to my personal experience. I won their black friday 100mbtc drop when they have 0 fucking reasons to credit me.

None of these are DT members. Their votes are pretty much worthless. I wondered who that is, that's all. His vote affects was affecting the flag's status since he is was a DT member and I haven't seen him before.

I was surprised to see that guy DT and now OFF DT. May be LoyceV can who was playing with rohang DT and OFF DT? I have noticed that from other thread in reputation shared by marlboroza. When I checked the user, I learnr that he only sent that one feedback in his forum journey.

What is DT anyways ? And how did i even get in it

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

[mindrust]

Does anybody know who that guy is posting almost only in sportsbet.io threads and opposed the flag without saying a word?

rohang

What do you mean who i am ?
Who  are you?
Everyone opposed/supported due to what they thought and their personal opinions.
I did the same, i dont see anyone saying anything why they opposed it under the flag, is that even possible?
Why even single me out? Cuz im not a regular poster or some legendary user like you? I am sorry my life doesnt allow me time for online forums and sit on keyboard all day. I like to follow sportsbet promos etc and thats why i am only active there.

I have no input on the case , and its irrelevant. Everyone posting here cant make sportsbet pay, and u all are delusional if you think you can.
I dont think they are scamming due to my personal experience. I won their black friday 100mbtc drop when they have 0 fucking reasons to credit me.

Why so angry? You were a DT member for a short period of time and I wondered your point of view. Don't be so mean.

[Pffrt]

What is DT anyways ? And how did i even get in it

LFC has added you to their trust list and you have been promoted to DT2 member since LFC is a DT1 member. This thread may give you some more explanation- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.0

[rohang]

Does anybody know who that guy is posting almost only in sportsbet.io threads and opposed the flag without saying a word?

rohang

What do you mean who i am ?
Who  are you?
Everyone opposed/supported due to what they thought and their personal opinions.
I did the same, i dont see anyone saying anything why they opposed it under the flag, is that even possible?
Why even single me out? Cuz im not a regular poster or some legendary user like you? I am sorry my life doesnt allow me time for online forums and sit on keyboard all day. I like to follow sportsbet promos etc and thats why i am only active there.

I have no input on the case , and its irrelevant. Everyone posting here cant make sportsbet pay, and u all are delusional if you think you can.
I dont think they are scamming due to my personal experience. I won their black friday 100mbtc drop when they have 0 fucking reasons to credit me.

Why so angry? You were a DT member for a short period of time and I wondered your point of view. Don't be so mean.

Not angry , just irritated , i 'supported' sportsbet because of my own experience + friends i know experience,
i dont even know what DT is and how i got in it/out of it.
Nor do i care for it,
Only here to follow gambling sites promos, sportsbet/nitro/stake, sportsbet are the most active so i am most active on theirs. simple
edit;
Sorry for coming off as rude, i am the furthest thing away from it. Just having a bad weekend and got irritated.

What is DT anyways ? And how did i even get in it

LFC has added you to their trust list and you have been promoted to DT2 member since LFC is a DT1 member. This thread may give you some more explanation- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.0

Thanks for the thread link, seems like people jerking off each other to gain bigger e-peen.
Dont care for it, had no idea when i was in or out of it.

edit: this will be my last reply here. Things are getting offtopic and out of respect to OP i would like to not clutter this thread with irrelevant posts. Hope whoever is in the wrong corrects himself

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

[suchmoon]

Was this the case here? How is that they didn't spot multi accounts before player won, but as soon as they start withdrawing...."peanuts", SB investigated account? Oh, wait, never mind  

I think I have a bulletproof 100% winning strategy. I'll share it for free just because I'm generous today. Regular price 300 BTC.

Create an account on Sportsbet. Make ludicrous bets. If you win - great. If you lose - create another account, contact support and say "hey, I have multiple accounts". Technically they should allow you to withdraw the deposited funds and cancel the losses like they cancelled the winnings here. To make it extra bulletproof, create both accounts in advance.


This whole multi-accounting thing is idiotic, no question about it. But I don't think there was a violation of a written contract here. Written contract gives Sportsbet the right to do what they did.

- smiley because some dildo will surely think I'm being serious with my "strategy".

[mindrust]

. But I don't think there was a violation of a written contract here. Written contract gives Sportsbet the right to do what they did.

[marlboroza]

To make it extra bulletproof, create both accounts in advance.

Hm, but in both scenarios you will get your deposit back, just like you have never ever gambled (investigation and all that crap). It's not really winning strategy. Technically, if player has never won until now, SB should send him his losses back and deduct winnings if any.

If you win - great. If you lose - create another account, contact support and say "hey, I have multiple accounts"

In this case player didn't cheat because they had only one account at that moment. It goes to regular win/lose category.

[suchmoon]

https://i.imgur.com/LEc5z.jpg

You look good, taking your vitamins daily?

Assuming you have a problem with me saying that there is no written contract violation - the written contract (T&C) says that multiple accounts are not allowed, it requires that users "acknowledge that Sportsbet.io shall be the final decision-maker as to whether you have violated rules, terms or conditions", and it doesn't require Sportsbet to post proof publicly. If you sign an unfavorable contract I don't think you can claim it was violated when things don't go your way.

Hm, but in both scenarios you will get your deposit back, just like you have never ever gambled. It's not really winning strategy. Technically, if player has never won until now, SB should send him his losses back and deduct winnings if any.

Well, technically you could forget that you had multiple accounts if you win. Just like casinos remember to check for multiple accounts if you win.

[mindrust]

Assuming you have a problem with me saying that there is no written contract violation - the written contract (T&C) says that multiple accounts are not allowed and it doesn't require Sportsbet to post proof publicly. If you sign an unfavorable contract I don't think you can claim it was violated when things don't go your way... unless the contract is unlawful perhaps, but I doubt that's the case here.

So you are completely OK with sportsbet.io's actions that is, seizing the player's winnings without showing any proofs for their claims and asking for KYC even though they were going to throw the documents right to the trash can.

This definitely is NOT the way how a trusted/reputable casino should act. "to save peanuts."

[neymarjr12]

https://i.imgur.com/LEc5z.jpg

You look good, taking your vitamins daily?

Assuming you have a problem with me saying that there is no written contract violation - the written contract (T&C) says that multiple accounts are not allowed and it doesn't require Sportsbet to post proof publicly. If you sign an unfavorable contract I don't think you can claim it was violated when things don't go your way... unless the contract is unlawful perhaps, but I doubt that's the case here.

So then Sportsbet can disable ALL of the accounts on the platform, claim that everyone was multi accounting and don't provide ANY proof to anyone, right?

[drexlas]

I agree with all @efialtis said on this topic.

As a long time user of Sportsbet I can't believe they would try to scam somebody for 0.4 BTC. Heck they gave more than half of that to me as a reload bonus while I was high rolling there. They are very high on my trusted pages list and probably the most trusted gambling site.

That being said I am also aware that we are in highly unregulated space and I believe service providers should be much more open in cases like this. I don't know how their multi accounting algorithm works and I even understand they can't publicly provide all info since then the scammers would have an easier time but they have to provide something. There simply has to be some sort of transparency.

Do you guys remember those Wednesday poker freerolls? There has been so much multi accounting there that it was unplayable in the early stages of tournament. I was wandering for long time what does the Sportsbet gain from promo like that and my best answer is just - a confirmation of the multi account scammers. They have great promos and multi accounting really gives edge in those promos, both against the house and against other players.

you better stop talking trash and very very fast stop with this moron talk
you are working for them and they pay you t defend them, you did not play with them and they did not give you money

i hope neymr will get his money soon
and we have to make sure nobody will ever play here again ever
sportsbet.io SCAM numero uno

[Use Your Brain]

seizing the player's winnings without showing any proofs for their claims

Again with this "proof"?   Wasnt it already determined sportsbet isnt going to disclose sensitive information.   This was beatin to death already and now its just getting repetitive.

for KYC even though they were going to throw the documents right to the trash can.

You must not be much of a gambler cuz this isnt how kyc works.   These gambling havens want the ir customers to keep playing they dont want them to leave their gambling haven.    The players lose more than they win so it is not in casinos best interest to not let a degenerate gamble.   kyc is normal for bitcoin for reasons already stated. 

[mindrust]

seizing the player's winnings without showing any proofs for their claims

Again with this "proof"?   Wasnt it already determined sportsbet isnt going to disclose sensitive information.   This was beatin to death already and now its just getting repetitive.

for KYC even though they were going to throw the documents right to the trash can.

You must not be much of a gambler cuz this isnt how kyc works.   These gambling havens want the ir customers to keep playing they dont want them to leave their gambling haven.    The players lose more than they win so it is not in casinos best interest to not let a degenerate gamble.   kyc is normal for bitcoin for reasons already stated.  

I don't buy it.

Fuck KYC.

freebitco.in has no KYC and they are killing it.


Also see:

2. Fiat+Crypto casinos strip all pseudo anonymity from Crypto gamblers, because they require full KYC requirements. (This in most cases are not a choice, but a regulatory requirement linked to their Fiat links to government.

Sadly point 2 applies also to many pure crypto casinos. There are only a few of them don't ask KYC at all.

Casinos use KYC to cover up their lack of technical knowledge and general faults.

If someone goes to freebitco.in (it is only an example, the truth is i don't know any other casino that is completely KYC free) and win 1000btc today by hacking the website or by just playing honest and withdraw it immediately, they won't ask you your KYC documents. You'll be able to get your money right away.

But if they catch you while hacking, they'll lock up your account, seize your coins and give a kick in the butt and post the proofs in the forum.

That's how you should deal with scammers.

[suchmoon]

So you are completely OK with sportsbet.io's actions that is, seizing the player's winnings without showing any proofs for their claims and asking for KYC even though they were going to throw the documents right to the trash can.

This definitely is NOT the way how a trusted/reputable casino should act. "to save peanuts."

I'm not ok with KYC and anti-multi-accounting rules in general and I've already stated so earlier in the thread. That doesn't mean there is a written contract violation here.

So then Sportsbet can disable ALL of the accounts on the platform, claim that everyone was multi accounting and don't provide ANY proof to anyone, right?

Not the point. According to the T&Cs you presumably agreed to, you shouldn't be claiming that they violated a written contract unless there is some separate contract that you signed. Is there?

[mindrust]

So you are completely OK with sportsbet.io's actions that is, seizing the player's winnings without showing any proofs for their claims and asking for KYC even though they were going to throw the documents right to the trash can.

This definitely is NOT the way how a trusted/reputable casino should act. "to save peanuts."

I'm not ok with KYC and anti-multi-accounting rules in general and I've already stated so earlier in the thread. That doesn't mean there is a written contract violation here.

So then Sportsbet can disable ALL of the accounts on the platform, claim that everyone was multi accounting and don't provide ANY proof to anyone, right?

Not the point. According to the T&Cs you presumably agreed to, you shouldn't be claiming that they violated a written contract unless there is some separate contract that you signed. Is there?

ToC is not the law. This is one of those similarities with the livecoin's thread that I was talking about earlier.

Sportsbet.io should just pay his peanuts and be done with it. If they cannot pay, they should tell explain us the reason why.

[neymarjr12]

So you are completely OK with sportsbet.io's actions that is, seizing the player's winnings without showing any proofs for their claims and asking for KYC even though they were going to throw the documents right to the trash can.

This definitely is NOT the way how a trusted/reputable casino should act. "to save peanuts."

I'm not ok with KYC and anti-multi-accounting rules in general and I've already stated so earlier in the thread. That doesn't mean there is a written contract violation here.

So then Sportsbet can disable ALL of the accounts on the platform, claim that everyone was multi accounting and don't provide ANY proof to anyone, right?

Not the point. According to the T&Cs you presumably agreed to, you shouldn't be claiming that they violated a written contract unless there is some separate contract that you signed. Is there?

Is there a point in the contract where Sportsbet can disable an account and seize the winnings without providing any proof?

[Use Your Brain]

I don't buy it.

Fuck KYC.

freebitco.in has no KYC and they are killing it.

No offense but you cant say "Fuck KYC"  but are being paid by Playbetr who asks for KYC.  
makes u sound like a oh i dont know, maybe a hypocrit

ToC is not the law.

maybe not the law but you agree to it when you decide to deposit your coins there

Sportsbet.io should just pay his peanuts and be done with it. If they cannot pay, they should tell explain us the reason why.

failing kyc and multi accounting isnt good enough for you apparently

[mindrust]

I don't buy it.

Fuck KYC.

freebitco.in has no KYC and they are killing it.

No offense but you cant say "Fuck KYC"  but are being paid by Playbetr who asks for KYC.  
makes u sound like a oh i dont know, maybe a hypocrit

I say whatever the fuck I want, if playbetr doesn't like what I said, they are free to remove me from their campaign.

ToC is not the law.

maybe not the law but you agree to it when you decide to deposit your coins there

ToC is not a license to scam.

Sportsbet.io should just pay his peanuts and be done with it. If they cannot pay, they should tell explain us the reason why.

failing kyc and multi accounting isnt good enough for you apparently

These accusations are baseless for now.

And, post from your main account please.

[suchmoon]

ToC is not the law.

But that's the written contract referred by the flag that points to this thread. If Sportsbet broke the law then the OP can sue them but as far as trust system is concerned we shouldn't be saying that a written contract has been violated when we disagree with the terms of the contract. Lots of deals conducted on this forum may be not 100% lawful in all jurisdictions (shark loaning for example) but we have come to a consensus, or so I thought, that we still treat them as contracts for the purposes of the flag system.

This is one of those similarities with the livecoin's thread that I was talking about earlier.

IIRC Livecoin flag is type 2 (implied contract).

Is there a point in the contract where Sportsbet can disable an account and seize the winnings without providing any proof?

You have a Sportsbet account, I don't. Enlighten us.

[mindrust]

But that's the written contract referred by the flag that points to this thread. If Sportsbet broke the law then the OP can sue them but as far as trust system is concerned we shouldn't be saying that a written contract has been violated when we disagree with the terms of the contract. Lots of deals conducted on this forum may be not 100% lawful in all jurisdictions (shark loaning for example) but we have come to a consensus, or so I thought, that we still treat them as contracts for the purposes of the flag system.

The universal written contract we have states that the casino agrees to pay your winnings which sportsbet.io fails at miserably.

You play in a casino not to leave your winnings on the table when you are told to by the casino manager?

Do you?

Go on, say "I do".

[suchmoon]

The universal written contract we have states that the casino agrees to pay your winnings which sportsbet.io fails at miserably.

Quote it.

You play in a casino not to leave your winnings on the table when you are told to by the casino manager?

Do you?

Go on, say "I do".

Straw man / loaded question. Let's stick to the contract debate.

[neymarjr12]

failing kyc and multi accounting isnt good enough for you apparently

Prove that I did those.

ToC is not the law.

But that's the written contract referred by the flag that points to this thread. If Sportsbet broke the law then the OP can sue them but as far as trust system is concerned we shouldn't be saying that a written contract has been violated when we disagree with the terms of the contract. Lots of deals conducted on this forum may be not 100% lawful in all jurisdictions (shark loaning for example) but we have come to a consensus, or so I thought, that we still treat them as contracts for the purposes of the flag system.

This is one of those similarities with the livecoin's thread that I was talking about earlier.

IIRC Livecoin flag is type 2 (implied contract).

Is there a point in the contract where Sportsbet can disable an account and seize the winnings without providing any proof?

You have a Sportsbet account, I don't. Enlighten us.

There is point about multi accounting in the contract (it is obviously forbidden).
But there is no clear information about the procedure of investigation, i.e. they accuse me of multi accounting (again sorry for repeating, without any proof), I claim that this is my first and only account and ready to provide any documents to support my claim - if both parties don't change their view, the question goes beyond the contract, somewhere in the field of common law.

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

[suchmoon]

There is point about multi accounting in the contract (it is obviously forbidden).
But there is no clear information about the procedure of investigation, i.e. they accuse me of multi accounting (again sorry for repeating, without any proof), I claim that this is my first and only account and ready to provide any documents to support my claim - if both parties don't change their view, the question goes beyond the contract, somewhere in the field of common law.

https://sportsbet.io/about/terms-and-conditions

17. Cancellations, Suspensions and Closure
17.1.    Without restricting our ability to rely on other remedies that may be available to us, we may suspend and/or terminate your account, cancel any outstanding bets and/or confiscate any or all funds in your account at our absolute discretion if:
[...]
(vi) we determine that you are breaching any term of these Terms and Conditions;
[...]
17.2.    You acknowledge that Sportsbet.io shall be the final decision-maker as to whether you have violated rules, terms or conditions in a manner that results in suspension or permanent barring from participation in our Websites.

Seems quite clear to me. Is it fair? Maybe not. Is it lawful? I don't know - talk to a lawyer. But I don't think you have a case for a type 3 flag here on this forum.

[mindrust]

The universal written contract we have states that the casino agrees to pay your winnings which sportsbet.io fails at miserably.

Quote it.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4509006.

"Sportsbet.io prides itself on its secure and trustworthy betting service^[1], with withdrawal times of around 1.5 minutes^[2]- amongst the fastest in the industry!"


[1] How can a casino be trustworthy if they don't pay their player's winnings?
[2] OP's winnings didn't arrive in ~1.5 minutes. How long it has been now?


I am all burned out. I tried to do the right thing, the rest is on the shoulders of the DT members. I was going to do spend my time on some other valuable shit and this ate my all day. Adios.

[neymarjr12]

There is point about multi accounting in the contract (it is obviously forbidden).
But there is no clear information about the procedure of investigation, i.e. they accuse me of multi accounting (again sorry for repeating, without any proof), I claim that this is my first and only account and ready to provide any documents to support my claim - if both parties don't change their view, the question goes beyond the contract, somewhere in the field of common law.

https://sportsbet.io/about/terms-and-conditions

17. Cancellations, Suspensions and Closure
17.1.    Without restricting our ability to rely on other remedies that may be available to us, we may suspend and/or terminate your account, cancel any outstanding bets and/or confiscate any or all funds in your account at our absolute discretion if:
[...]
(vi) we determine that you are breaching any term of these Terms and Conditions;
[...]
17.2.    You acknowledge that Sportsbet.io shall be the final decision-maker as to whether you have violated rules, terms or conditions in a manner that results in suspension or permanent barring from participation in our Websites.

Seems quite clear to me. Is it fair? Maybe not. Is it lawful? I don't know - talk to a lawyer. But I don't think you have a case for a type 3 flag here on this forum.

Then again, Sportsbet can disable ALL of the accounts on the platform, claim that everyone was multi accounting (or breached their rules an any other way) and don't provide ANY proof to anyone, right?

"Sportsbet.io prides itself on its secure and trustworthy betting service^[1], with withdrawal times of around 1.5 minutes^[2]- amongst the fastest in the industry!"


[1] How can a casino be trustworthy if they don't pay their player's winnings?
[2] OP's winnings didn't arrive in ~1.5 minutes. How long it has been now?

[2] More than a month now mate 

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

[actmyname]

Whether it's in the Terms of Conditions or not, general "no multiple accounts" rules punish players more often than anyone looking to abuse the actual site. Rather than target a symptom of a problem (i.e. multiple accounts from promotion abuse) they could just simply leave it at "don't use multiple accounts to abuse giveaways and promotions". The sweeping general term lets them do shit like this. What if a player, in one situation, comes back to the site after a year forgetting their previous account details? How about if they lose access to the password and email of an account? Any number of scenarios could be arbitrarily created, but that's not the real point: it's ToS like this, like the rollover requirements that some casinos use to "prevent money-laundering".

Masquerading as rules to prevent abuse against a minority of players, they in turn are used against every player.

[neymarjr12]

Whether it's in the Terms of Conditions or not, general "no multiple accounts" rules punish players more often than anyone looking to abuse the actual site. Rather than target a symptom of a problem (i.e. multiple accounts from promotion abuse) they could just simply leave it at "don't use multiple accounts to abuse giveaways and promotions". The sweeping general term lets them do shit like this. What if a player, in one situation, comes back to the site after a year forgetting their previous account details? How about if they lose access to the password and email of an account? Any number of scenarios could be arbitrarily created, but that's not the real point: it's ToS like this, like the rollover requirements that some casinos use to "prevent money-laundering".

Masquerading as rules to prevent abuse against a minority of players, they in turn are used against every player.

Regarding "abusing giveaways and promotions", I actually haven't received any of those from Sportsbet. The only thing I remember I had an odds Boost on couple of bets (when your odds change by several % up), that's it.
This again raises even more questions why they decided to disable me without providing any reasoning.

[yahoo62278]

I see the multiple accounts rule as a way for casinos to fuck players out of money without any negative repercussion. If the player is abusing giveaways/promotions by creating multiple accounts, then by all means deny his WD and show he done so. If the player has multiple accounts and has not abused anything, just made deposits and had a win, then pay the guy his money and move on.

The multiple account rule is a joke.

[Get-Paid.com]

I see the multiple accounts rule as a way for casinos to fuck players out of money without any negative repercussion. If the player is abusing giveaways/promotions by creating multiple accounts, then by all means deny his WD and show he done so. If the player has multiple accounts and has not abused anything, just made deposits and had a win, then pay the guy his money and move on.

The multiple account rule is a joke.

Exactly.
That's how it should be.

Sportsbet.io is damaging its reputation here for not doing so.

[marlboroza]

Well, technically you could forget that you had multiple accounts if you win. Just like casinos remember to check for multiple accounts if you win.

You could but as you said, casino will check it and remind you.

Then again, Sportsbet can disable ALL of the accounts on the platform, claim that everyone was multi accounting (or breached their rules an any other way) and don't provide ANY proof to anyone, right?

On internet forum? Yeah, they actually don't have to provide shit here.

like the rollover requirements that some casinos use to "prevent money-laundering".

That is actually stupidest excuse and rule I have ever heard, only thing which might prevent money laundering is KYC, but not selective KYC which is regular practice around here. Not related to topic but I remember there was one player who deposited $20(or was it $40?) on cloudbet, wanted to withdraw it and as he didn't wager that huge amount, cloudbet asked him KYC because of their AML policy. Lol!

[drexlas]

look how much victims this scam bookie make. why are they still here on the forum and active. away with them
every bookie has some problems with customers but sportsbetio and their casino site scams one after another

[yahoo62278]

look how much victims this scam bookie make. why are they still here on the forum and active. away with them
every bookie has some problems with customers but sportsbetio and their casino site scams one after another

I cannot confirm they're actually a scam at this point, but I do think the multi account rule needs some lee way.  Depends on the abuse IMO

[PrimeNumber7]

KYC

IMO, a lot of the time when a bitcoin casino is asking a customer to go through KYC, the purpose is to get their identity so the casino can go to law enforcement about actual cheating, such as hacking, or knowing the 'secret' seed in advance.

SB should disclose why they were asking the OP for his KYC information. They should also clarify as to what basis they are saying that the OP "did not pass" KYC....

So the flag is basically invalid because the dispute is about 0.271 BTC, not 0.373 BTC as claimed in the OP. I could understand a small discrepancy but I don't think we should be supporting "written contract" flags overstated by 37%. There's probably more reason to oppose the flag than support it based on the amount alone, i.e. the claim is "at least partially false".

SB has not paid the OP the 0.101 BTC they are offering.

Most of the time, with mortgages and with rent, your lender or landlord will not accept less than the total amount due. A tenant or borrower offering a partial payment may be rejected, and this offer will not make a person owe a lower amount. The OP has not accepted a payment in the lower amount that SB is offering, and as such, he is still allegedly owed the full 0.373 BTC.

[asche]

@neymarjr12 do you mind changing the amount scammed to the difference between what they are offering and the full amount? .271 BTC if I'm not mistaken?

I see the multiple accounts rule as a way for casinos to fuck players out of money without any negative repercussion. If the player is abusing giveaways/promotions by creating multiple accounts, then by all means deny his WD and show he done so. If the player has multiple accounts and has not abused anything, just made deposits and had a win, then pay the guy his money and move on.

The multiple account rule is a joke.

100% with you on this.

I hardly see any casino enforce this kind of rule when the player is negative on his accounts. The story changes rather quickly when the gambler is net positive...

[nutildah]

like the rollover requirements that some casinos use to "prevent money-laundering".

That is actually stupidest excuse and rule I have ever heard, only thing which might prevent money laundering is KYC, but not selective KYC which is regular practice around here.

Even casinos that don't require KYC do this... For casinos its usually a 2-3x rollover requirement and for sportsbooks its usually 1x. The only anonymous betting sites that don't are dice sites like Bustadice, etc.. It might be lame but its pretty standard. If they didn't do that, people could just use casinos as a mixer and there's nothing in it for them.

I'd actually be curious to know which sportsbooks don't have this requirement and will let you withdraw without wagering and without KYC.

[actmyname]

If they didn't do that, people could just use casinos as a mixer and there's nothing in it for them.

If people wanted to mix with casinos (for whatever reason) instead of a mixer, they could probably brunt the 1% fee in the form of house edge which I presume would be far less than the amount they are paying an alternative mixer. If it's not less than the amount they are paying, then why have the rule? That would be stopping irrational money launderers - a minority of a minority.

Does it stop money laundering? Kind of... but does it also create a massive benefit for the casino's end, ensuring that they get at least a small percentage of all users' deposits? Yes.A few BTC-based casinos did not have a rollover requirement... I'm not sure if there is a sportsbook out there.

[Get-Paid.com]

It looks like Sportsbet.io directly or indirectly is trying to sweep this issue under the rug!

Example: this user is annoyed that scam accusations are popping in the official thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1458034.msg54878809#msg54878809

And these 2 users blatantly ignore whatever was discussed prior to their messages and post some nonsense about soccer/football:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1458034.msg54879006#msg54879006
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1458034.msg54879504#msg54879504

What kind of feked up business is this?!

We support and promote lots of good businesses incl. gambling sites - but this one is shady as hell.

[nutildah]

If it's not less than the amount they are paying, then why have the rule?

I don't follow what you're saying here. The rule isn't for the would-be launderers. The rule is for the casino.

A couple years back I asked one particular casino about why they had that rule and they said it was one of the requirements according to the terms of their license, which was a Curacao license. I looked for the correspondence but must have deleted it long ago.

A few BTC-based casinos did not have a rollover requirement...

Such as...? Or you mean they didn't in the past and don't exist anymore...

Anyway, we're pretty off-topic now.

And these 2 users blatantly ignore whatever was discussed prior to their messages and post some nonsense about soccer/football:

Meh, just looks like people trying to continue conversation that is normal for that thread. They probably put the accusers on ignore.

[neymarjr12]

@neymarjr12 do you mind changing the amount scammed to the difference between what they are offering and the full amount? .271 BTC if I'm not mistaken?

You mean in the first post?

[asche]

@neymarjr12 do you mind changing the amount scammed to the difference between what they are offering and the full amount? .271 BTC if I'm not mistaken?

You mean in the first post?

I do.

Also a flag type 2 might gain more support since there is no proof of a written contract violation. But that's up to you really.

[neymarjr12]

I messaged Steve & told him he’s going to have to do more to satisfy some people on this by the way.

Edit - Just looked, he hasn’t been online since 7am ish so he won’t have seen my PM yet.

Did you get a reply from Steve? Or they decided to leave all the questions unanswered and admit my points?

[AB de Royse777]

Also a flag type 2 might gain more support since there is no proof of a written contract violation. But that's up to you really.

I am not sure but I think one can not create two flag against same user in 6 months or something. I have not checked the Turst topic for long time but I can recall that I have seen something about not allowing to create multiple flag against same user by a same accuser.

Regarding the amount, I think the following line will be very appropriate:

Amount Scammed: 0.373 BTC

Total amount in question: 0.373 BTC
Wants to offer: x
Amount want to scam: 0.373 BTC - x

I really did not think this amount thing was too hard to figure LOL

Edit: I had to look at the post made my Steve to figure x = 0.102 BTC

[Coin_trader]

This is my first time to see this scam thread and I'm a regular player on sportsbet.io before I stop last month. I don't encounter this kind of holding funds problem even though I withdraw/deposit back and forth many times within a day. I play an amount more than the OP declared amount. So I believe they will not freeze an account if they don't see any suspicious activity on it.

I'm not being paid by sportsbet and I don't have any connection with them.

You can see my withdrawal/deposit history here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1458034.msg54556238#msg54556238

I can show more older transaction if you want.

[asche]

I can show more older transaction if you want.

Not sure why you post here just because you as a person never had an issue. How is that relevant?

It is quite obvious that 99% of the time everything is smooth, otherwise there would be a lot more noise than this.

That doesn't mean that the remaining 1% is all fair and right.

[gosha@e-coin]

I can show more older transaction if you want.

It is quite obvious that 99% of the time everything is smooth, otherwise there would be a lot more noise than this.

What a joke. Read the internet, and Google for sportsbet.io scam. I rather would say that 99% of the time people are scammed, and 1% of the time it is smooth.
Seems that sportsbet.io has found some people who are trying to save their "reputation"

This is my first time to see this scam thread and I'm a regular player on sportsbet.io before I stop last month. I don't encounter this kind of holding funds problem even though I withdraw/deposit back and forth many times within a day. I play an amount more than the OP declared amount. So I believe they will not freeze an account if they don't see any suspicious activity on it.

I'm not being paid by sportsbet and I don't have any connection with them.

You can see my withdrawal/deposit history here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1458034.msg54556238#msg54556238

I can show more older transaction if you want.

Do you think we are stupid? You have an agreement with sportsbet.io
You will deposit funds in your account, and get this funds back after it. Easily to manipulate.
With your message you only proove that you are another employee from their team.

It looks like Sportsbet.io directly or indirectly is trying to sweep this issue under the rug!

Example: this user is annoyed that scam accusations are popping in the official thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1458034.msg54878809#msg54878809

And these 2 users blatantly ignore whatever was discussed prior to their messages and post some nonsense about soccer/football:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1458034.msg54879006#msg54879006
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1458034.msg54879504#msg54879504

What kind of feked up business is this?!

We support and promote lots of good businesses incl. gambling sites - but this one is shady as hell.

Yes, that is because these 2 users are working for sportsbet.io
I can provide a list from all the users that are defending sportsbet.io and are just hired to defend them and to push negative posts away.
It is the standard way of working in their procedure. People complain, and Steve comes into the play with a poster/flyer and the shill accounts are talking about games, poker and other nonsene not related stuff.

[Coin_trader]

I can show more older transaction if you want.

Not sure why you post here just because you as a person never had an issue. How is that relevant?

It is quite obvious that 99% of the time everything is smooth, otherwise there would be a lot more noise than this.

That doesn't mean that the remaining 1% is all fair and right.

My point was very simple, if there is really no malicious activity on the account then there will be no problem at all. I'm not here to argue or so. I've been using sportsbet.io more than a year without a problem and seeing this kind of scam accusation will surely bother me because I'm a player on the accused casino. Is it wrong to share experience on the accused casino?



EDIT:

This is my last post on this thread. 

[Pffrt]

I am not sure but I think one can not create two flag against same user in 6 months or something.

Yes, you are correct. Users can create flag on same user once in a 180 days period. But someone else with linking archived proof by creating a thread can create a new flag type if anyone feels the necessity.

These limits are in place:
 - Per 180 days, you can only give 1 flag of each type to a given user. So you can't give someone multiple written-contract-violation flags in 180 days, for example.
 - Globally, per year you can only create 1 flag per activity point you have, but at least 1/year.

[AB de Royse777]

These limits are in place:
 - Per 180 days, you can only give 1 flag of each type to a given user. So you can't give someone multiple written-contract-violation flags in 180 days, for example.
 - Globally, per year you can only create 1 flag per activity point you have, but at least 1/year.

Thanks for bringing it. It says "each type" which should mean that neymarjr12 can create a type 2 since he has not created a type 2 yet.

~snip~

GP can you stay away from trolling in this thread? You are not helping anyone but annoying.

[suchmoon]

Thanks for bringing it. It says "each type" which should mean that neymarjr12 can create a type 2 since he has not created a type 2 yet.

Yes.

But someone else with linking archived proof by creating a thread can create a new flag type if anyone feels the necessity.

I would advise against that. Type 2/3 flags should be created by someone who is a party to the contract and suffered damages.

[gosha@e-coin]

Somehow I feel personally addressed as a GP. First, I post where I want and when I want.
Second; this is not trolling but I would like to emphasize the facts and put them together clearly. I know much more what's going on than you can even think / imagine.
All I can say at this point is that my investigation is a result of deliberate damage to certain bookmakers. These bookmakers now want to retaliate and resources have been put in from above. So my advice to sportsbet.io: Keep your dogs on a lead on the leash here, they may bark occasionally but keep them on a lead. Otherwise, the consequences are beyond your control.
Let this be a clear signal. I have found all the information I need. If I notice that sportsbet.io is releasing her dogs from other bookmakers, I will be active again immediately.

[suchmoon]

Somehow I feel personally addressed as a GP. First, I post where I want and when I want.
Second; this is not trolling but I would like to emphasize the facts and put them together clearly. I know much more what's going on than you can even think / imagine.
All I can say at this point is that my investigation is a result of deliberate damage to certain bookmakers. These bookmakers now want to retaliate and resources have been put in from above. So my advice to sportsbet.io: Keep your dogs on a lead on the leash here, they may bark occasionally but keep them on a lead. Otherwise, the consequences are beyond your control.
Let this be a clear signal. I have found all the information I need. If I notice that sportsbet.io is releasing her dogs from other bookmakers, I will be active again immediately.

Is this an admission that you're game-protect, or that you fabricated this accusation, or both?

[asche]

Let this be a clear signal. I have found all the information I need. If I notice that sportsbet.io is releasing her dogs from other bookmakers, I will be active again immediately.

What does that even mean? Empty threats usually don't do anything more than wasting yours and others time.

[Get-Paid.com]

Somehow I feel personally addressed as a GP. First, I post where I want and when I want.
Second; this is not trolling but I would like to emphasize the facts and put them together clearly. I know much more what's going on than you can even think / imagine.
All I can say at this point is that my investigation is a result of deliberate damage to certain bookmakers. These bookmakers now want to retaliate and resources have been put in from above. So my advice to sportsbet.io: Keep your dogs on a lead on the leash here, they may bark occasionally but keep them on a lead. Otherwise, the consequences are beyond your control.
Let this be a clear signal. I have found all the information I need. If I notice that sportsbet.io is releasing her dogs from other bookmakers, I will be active again immediately.

I remember GameProtect very well, there is no way in hell GP would talk about dogs or their leash etc. - he doesn't have good English like this guy.

Why don't you leave Gosha alone and let him express himself normally like everyone else here?

There's no way in hell this guy is GP, so just stop it.

[examplens]

I can provide a list from all the users that are defending sportsbet.io and are just hired to defend them and to push negative posts away.
It is the standard way of working in their procedure. People complain, and Steve comes into the play with a poster/flyer and the shill accounts are talking about games, poker and other nonsene not related stuff.

Even I am not satisfied with SB explanation here and how they handle this situation, they owe a precise explanation.
But, I'm a little confused here. Sportsbet hires users to defend them, I guess they will pay them for it.
So, they refuse to pay user X and spend this money to pay users YY to defend it and save his reputation. why complicate, they definitely have to spend money?

[asche]

Even I am not satisfied with SB explanation here and how they handle this situation, they owe a precise explanation.
But, I'm a little confused here. Sportsbet hires users to defend them, I guess they will pay them for it.
So, they refuse to pay user X and spend this money to pay users YY to defend it and save his reputation. why complicate, they definitely have to spend money?

I'm not saying they did do that, but when you are already paying user, you would just have to imply that you would expel them from said benefits to actually have leverage on them. So no, it wouldn't cost them extra money.

Then again, there is no indication/evidence that this happened.

[rdbase]

Somehow I feel personally addressed as a GP. First, I post where I want and when I want.
Second; this is not trolling but I would like to emphasize the facts and put them together clearly. I know much more what's going on than you can even think / imagine.
All I can say at this point is that my investigation is a result of deliberate damage to certain bookmakers. These bookmakers now want to retaliate and resources have been put in from above. So my advice to sportsbet.io: Keep your dogs on a lead on the leash here, they may bark occasionally but keep them on a lead. Otherwise, the consequences are beyond your control.
Let this be a clear signal. I have found all the information I need. If I notice that sportsbet.io is releasing her dogs from other bookmakers, I will be active again immediately.

Is this an admission that you're game-protect, or that you fabricated this accusation, or both?

That's how I take it as well.
Due to the fact why would an ex-employee account of wirex (formerly known e-coin as this gosha didn't seem to know before he bought the account ) even care so much about online casinos and be focused so much towards two casinos GP was so inthralled with til their wits end.
Ultimately getting them banned off of here, and yet we are today talking with him yet again.
Game-protect will do game-protect sort of things I guess, thinking nobody will see past their words of deception. Very amusing.
But still a rule on using this forum: Ban evasion is an offense.
So good luck with that G.P

[AB de Royse777]

What's up with neymarjr12?
I see he was online but did not admit me, asche and others yet. Is he banned or something else?

@neymarjr12 can you https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5263445.msg54880848#msg54880848
And also create a new flag and this will be type 2.
My stupidity that I was suggesting you to create a type 3 earlier.

[gosha@e-coin]

Somehow I feel personally addressed as a GP. First, I post where I want and when I want.
Second; this is not trolling but I would like to emphasize the facts and put them together clearly. I know much more what's going on than you can even think / imagine.
All I can say at this point is that my investigation is a result of deliberate damage to certain bookmakers. These bookmakers now want to retaliate and resources have been put in from above. So my advice to sportsbet.io: Keep your dogs on a lead on the leash here, they may bark occasionally but keep them on a lead. Otherwise, the consequences are beyond your control.
Let this be a clear signal. I have found all the information I need. If I notice that sportsbet.io is releasing her dogs from other bookmakers, I will be active again immediately.

Is this an admission that you're game-protect, or that you fabricated this accusation, or both?

But still a rule on using this forum: Ban evasion is an offense.

The only offense in here that has been made, is that sportsbet.io scammed many people.
Besides that, you are using many alt accounts. You think you can hide it worth organised actions, but I am not stupid.
Everything is clear.

[neymarjr12]

What's up with neymarjr12?
I see he was online but did not admit me, asche and others yet. Is he banned or something else?

@neymarjr12 can you https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5263445.msg54880848#msg54880848
And also create a new flag and this will be type 2.
My stupidity that I was suggesting you to create a type 3 earlier.

Hi Royse!
Was online to check whether @sportsbet.io replied, bit still didn't happen.
Changed the amounts in the description post, is it right now?
What do you mean "create a new flag and this will be type 2" ?

[AB de Royse777]

Hi Royse!
Was online to check whether @sportsbet.io replied, bit still didn't happen.
Changed the amounts in the description post, is it right now?
What do you mean "create a new flag and this will be type 2" ?

Good to get your response. Sorry that your case has not been responded by sportsbet.io yet but hopefully Steve gives his input soon.

Total amount in question = 0.373 BTC
Sportsbet.io wants to offer = 0.102 BTC
Amount want to scam = 0.271 BTC

This look better now. For some strange reasons first time someone had to give his amount in a different fashion but yes we can not complain now.

1. Go here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;addflag=832366
2. Check 2nd radio box.

We call this type -2 flag.

Then follow the instruction and use this topic link ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5263445.0 ) for the reference of the flag before hitting the confirm button at the next page.

Good luck.

The only offense in here that has been made, is that sportsbet.io scammed many people.
Besides that, you are using many alt accounts. You think you can hide it worth organised actions, but I am not stupid.
Everything is clear.

If you have problem with sportsbet scammed many then please make a different thread about it and keep trolling your issues. Please not here. When I see your post I feel annoyed. And I am 100% confident that a lot of others do feel the same. Stop trolling and annoying the contributors of this topic.

[adam0991]

It seems Sportsbet.io are avoiding posting on the forums at the moment. The account has been online various times but they are probably ignoring all the heat that is around them over the past few days.

Playing the silent game.

[neymarjr12]

Hi Royse!
Was online to check whether @sportsbet.io replied, bit still didn't happen.
Changed the amounts in the description post, is it right now?
What do you mean "create a new flag and this will be type 2" ?

Good to get your response. Sorry that your case has not been responded by sportsbet.io yet but hopefully Steve gives his input soon.

Total amount in question = 0.373 BTC
Sportsbet.io wants to offer = 0.102 BTC
Amount want to scam = 0.271 BTC

This look better now. For some strange reasons first time someone had to give his amount in a different fashion but yes we can not complain now.

1. Go here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;addflag=832366
2. Check 2nd radio box.
https://i.imgur.com/SPs4QiH.png
We call this type -2 flag.

Then follow the instruction and use this topic link ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5263445.0 ) for the reference of the flag before hitting the confirm button at the next page.

Good luck.

The only offense in here that has been made, is that sportsbet.io scammed many people.
Besides that, you are using many alt accounts. You think you can hide it worth organised actions, but I am not stupid.
Everything is clear.

If you have problem with sportsbet scammed many then please make a different thread about it and keep trolling your issues. Please not here. When I see your post I feel annoyed. And I am 100% confident that a lot of others do feel the same. Stop trolling and annoying the contributors of this topic.

Done! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2171

[AB de Royse777]

Done! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2171

Good job. Flag supported.
For visibility would you add the flag link in your main topic post?
Add it at the end with some the text link:

Flag created: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2171



Good luck again.

[neymarjr12]

Done! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2171

Good job. Flag supported.
For visibility would you add the flag link in your main topic post?
Add it at the end with some the text link:

Flag created: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2171

https://i.imgur.com/Y2KZ0F2.png

Good luck again.

Done! Thank you for help!

[Get-Paid.com]

This was showing in the SportsBet.io official thread:



Until LFC_Bitcoin and Nutildah marked they are opposing the flag (hypocrites).

Now the flag was removed from their official thread due to "Insufficient Support".

If you support this accusation please show your support here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2171

[baikov]

This was showing in the SportsBet.io official thread:

https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuQNXC65.png&t=615&c=7EABu0C92whsoA

Until LFC_Bitcoin and Nutildah marked they are opposing the flag (hypocrites).

Now the flag was removed from their official thread due to "Insufficient Support".

If you support this accusation please show your support here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2171

Hello! I deposited 70eur to my account and got 370eur after some winnings. After I tried to withdraw for the first time ever and got my withdrawal rejected. I was asked to complete KYC procedure. I sent my local (Russian) passport and bank statement. After that I was asked to complete KYC using Veriff, where I took a picture with my international passport. After a few days security department asked me if I have any other account, which I actually just do not need. After I answered and waited some more days they asked if I know some other players and sent me their accounts (nicknames), which I saw for the first time because I didn’t know any other guys who use their service. After I answered they told that i am trying to launder money and that they will only send my deposit back. I am really angry because they blocked my account and I didn’t receive my winnings! HELP ME PLEASE!

[Slow death]

This was showing in the SportsBet.io official thread:



Until LFC_Bitcoin and Nutildah marked they are opposing the flag (hypocrites).

Now the flag was removed from their official thread due to "Insufficient Support".

If you support this accusation please show your support here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2171

Hello! I deposited 70eur to my account and got 370eur after some winnings. After I tried to withdraw for the first time ever and got my withdrawal rejected. I was asked to complete KYC procedure. I sent my local (Russian) passport and bank statement. After that I was asked to complete KYC using Veriff, where I took a picture with my international passport. After a few days security department asked me if I have any other account, which I actually just do not need. After I answered and waited some more days they asked if I know some other players and sent me their accounts (nicknames), which I saw for the first time because I didn’t know any other guys who use their service. After I answered they told that i am trying to launder money and that they will only send my deposit back. I am really angry because they blocked my account and I didn’t receive my winnings! HELP ME PLEASE!

you must create new thread here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=83.0

and you must post proofs, at least images of your deposit and images of the conversation you had with the support.

edit: I see that you already created the thread, but you did not post proof on the thread that you created

[JollyGood]

If I have this correct, here is a mini-synopsis of what happened:

1- Sportsbet state in their ToS:

12. BONUS RULES
12.1 General
12.1.1 Bonuses are available at our discretion and we reserve the right to restrict the availability of any bonus to any player at any time.
12.1.2 Fraudulent or multiple entries will not be accepted, neither will entries made in breach of these Standard Promotional Terms or the specific promotional terms.
12.1.3 Some of our Bonuses may be offered to you on a complimentary basis or when taking part and completing promotions through the website.
12.1.4 All promotions are not available to players using an e-wallet when depositing funds.
12.1.5 Players who are Self-Excluded are not eligible to receive any bonus. Players that Self-Exclude during the course of bonus qualification or after a Bonus Token has been placed but before any winnings (Cash or Bonus) were accumulated, will not be eligible to receive any winnings (whether as Cash or as a Bonus Token)
12.1.6 Only one Bonus offer per player, per household, per shared computer and shared IP address unless otherwise stated. We do not allow “Multiple Accounts”. Player account details will be determined by any or all combination of name, mailing address, email address, computer (serial), IP address, payment (deposit/withdrawal) method used and any other form of identification.
12.1.7 By accepting any of our bonuses, you agree to adhere to these Bonus Rules and any applicable rules made available to you before or when accepting a Bonus with us. You must also comply with our full Terms and Conditions at all times.
12.1.8 We reserve the right to withhold any Bonus, associated winnings whether from cash or bonus wagers if believed that the offer has been abused and/or where the terms of the offer are not fulfilled, or any irregular betting patterns are found including collusion, and this decision is final.


2- The rules are clearly stated in the footer of the Sportsbet website


3- By signing up to the Sportbet website, all users are confirming they agree to and will abide by the ToS that are clearly stated beforehand therefore all users are aware of which type of contract they are getting in to before they are signing up


4- The most important of these rules is 12.1.8 because it clearly states Sportbet have the right to effectively withhold any winnings or bonuses if they believe they have reason: "We reserve the right to withhold any Bonus, associated winnings whether from cash or bonus wagers if believed that the offer has been abused and/or where the terms of the offer are not fulfilled, or any irregular betting patterns are found including collusion, and this decision is final."


5- Sportsbet ToS do not state that in the event of them implementing clause 12.1.8 they are under any obligation to justify their findings to the suspected fraudster or to a third party such as various members of this forum. Sportsbet are also bound by European data protection laws as stated in their ToS (5.1 and 5.3):

5. CONFIDENTIALITY

5.1 We will take reasonable and appropriate measures to ensure that Your personal information as disclosed to Us shall remain confidential. We will not disclose Your personal data or betting information unless required to do so by any applicable laws and regulations, court order, the relevant gaming and law enforcement authorities or other than as set forth in these Terms and Conditions. It is also Your responsibility to keep Your personal information confidential.

5.3 We will process Your personal data in accordance with Data Protection Act 2018, General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 2018, other relevant legislation and regulation and Our Privacy Policy.


6- The OP has claimed he is innocent. From what is seems on the surface the OP is saying that he is ready to comply with KYC and sent it to Sportsbet but they rejected it as 'failed'.

In my opinion the bottom line in this situation is this:

Sportsbet concluded beyond reasonable doubt the OP conducted in activity that breached their ToS and they are under no obligation to explain to anybody why they came to that conclusion. They also stated it was not as simple as it being based on multiple accounts from the same IP address. Furthermore they went on to state they will not state what their security protocols are as they will give an obvious advantage to those that try to defraud them.

All existing Sportsbet users and all future new sign ups have to accept their accounts could be frozen at any point without a fully explained justification and they could lose all their winnings but will probably get back their initial deposited funds providing they have not been spent. The OP has protested his innocence but that has not stopped Sportsbet from coming to the same conclusion that their ToS were breached.


In a nutshell in conclusion:

There is no evidence Sportsbet selective scammed the OP

...but...

There is no evidence the OP had multiple accounts because nothing has been presented to this thread from either party that shows they have a valid case.

The OP has created two flags created against Sportsbet on the basis of: "neymarjr12 alleges: sportsbet.io violated a written contract, resulting in damages, in the specific act referenced here. sportsbet.io did not make the victims of this act roughly whole, AND it is not the case that all of the victims forgave the act. It is not grossly inaccurate to say that the act occurred around June 2020. No previously-created flag covers this same act, unless the flag was created with inaccurate data preventing its acceptance."

If the ToS clearly state Sportsbet can behave as judge, jury and executioner then the flags created by the OP are invalid and inappropriate because Sportsbet behaved in accordance with their ToS. The OP has no legitimate claim to create a flag on the basis of violating a written contract because according to Sportsbet he breached their ToS and clearly Sportsbet acted within the rules of their ToS.

Regarding the second flag, it was created by efialtis against Sportsbet on the basis of: "efialtis alleges: Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with sportsbet.io 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."

From what I have read in the thread, the second flag has more merit than the ones the OP created because it is opinion based. I can only say that if users believe with those ToS anybody is at high risk of losing money with Sportsbet then they are right from their perspective. Most crypto exchanges and as well as most betting websites have similar ToS which could be exploited by unscrupulous website operators or only be used in exceptional circumstances where they feel fraud has taken place. Those are subjective views.

In this case, based purely on the evidence available I cannot support the flags by the OP because in my opinion a written contract was not violated by Sportsbet.

Also I cannot support the second flag because in my opinion users are not at a high risk of losing money at Sportsbet.

Having said all this, there are two main points of concern for me that Sportsbet and other betting websites implement on a wide scale:

1- I do not know why Sportsbet asked for KYC when they knew it would definitely not be enough. Even if the KYC is valid and even if they have a video call to ascertain identity of the user but he is linked with multiple accounts and breach of ToS then why would they ask for KYC?

2- Why do all these issues of multiple accounts come up after a user wins an amount or tries to withdraw - Sportsbet and other websites should have algorithms that start freezing accounts as soon as multiple accounts and breaches are detected because it means as long as users in breach of the ToS are depositing crypto and spending it losing on bets it remains a non-issue but as soon as a win or withdrawal takes place it triggers a breach of ToS

[Get-Paid.com]

Why do all these issues of multiple accounts come up after a user wins an amount or tries to withdraw - Sportsbet and other websites should have algorithms that start freezing accounts as soon as multiple accounts and breaches are detected because it means as long as users in breach of the ToS are depositing crypto and spending it losing on bets it remains a non-issue but as soon as a win or withdrawal takes place it triggers a breach of ToS

BINGO!

And why is that? Answer = 

[suchmoon]

This was showing in the SportsBet.io official thread:

You really need to learn how flags work. It was active only to you and maybe a handful of other users.

[Get-Paid.com]

This was showing in the SportsBet.io official thread:

You really need to learn how flags work. It was active only to you and maybe a handful of other users.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1458034.msg54892632#msg54892632

[suchmoon]

This was showing in the SportsBet.io official thread:

You really need to learn how flags work. It was active only to you and maybe a handful of other users.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1458034.msg54892632#msg54892632

Great. Except:

I don't see it logged in or not. I'm guessing trust list dependent.

That's how flags work. You automatically add 1 "trusted" vote for it when you support it and look at it yourself. For most users it never had +3 support required for that banned to show up.

[Get-Paid.com]

Great. Except:

Except this happened because

LFC_Bitcoin and Nutildah marked they are opposing the flag (hypocrites).

[nutildah]

LFC_Bitcoin and Nutildah marked they are opposing the flag (hypocrites).

How does opposing the flag make me a hypocrite?

I would be a hypocrite if I said "I think Sportsbet is cheating neymarjr12" and then I opposed the flag.

What it boils down to is, as things currently stand, I take their word over neymarjr12's. However, if more evidence were to manifest itself in favor of the accuser or against Sportsbet, then I could withdraw my opposition or potentially even support the flag. This seems highly unlikely, partially based on what the wording of the flag entails, but I remain open minded on the subject.

[JollyGood]

The answer does not have to be = SCAM

Each situation should be judged/assessed on its own merit.

Why do all these issues of multiple accounts come up after a user wins an amount or tries to withdraw - Sportsbet and other websites should have algorithms that start freezing accounts as soon as multiple accounts and breaches are detected because it means as long as users in breach of the ToS are depositing crypto and spending it losing on bets it remains a non-issue but as soon as a win or withdrawal takes place it triggers a breach of ToS

BINGO!

And why is that? Answer =  

[Get-Paid.com]

What it boils down to is, as things currently stand, I take their word over neymarjr12's.

That is fine, and that is your own judgement.

But opposing the flag instead of being neutral (i.e. don't support nor oppose the flag) - that's what makes you hypocrite!

[nutildah]

What it boils down to is, as things currently stand, I take their word over neymarjr12's.

That is fine, and that is your own judgement.

But opposing the flag instead of being neutral (i.e. don't support nor oppose the flag) - that's what makes you hypocrite!

What? No it doesn't. Opposing the flag means I oppose the flag. I've opposed dozens of flags since the introduction of the flag system. Am I a hypocrite for all of those as well? You need to follow suchmoon's advice and read up a little bit on what the flag system is all about.

[Get-Paid.com]

What? No it doesn't. Opposing the flag means I oppose the flag. I've opposed dozens of flags since the introduction of the flag system. Am I a hypocrite for all of those as well? You need to follow suchmoon's advice and read up a little bit on what the flag system is all about.

You realize if you remove your opposition then the big red banner would be back to show up in the official thread of SportsBet.io ?

If they were an individual like you I'd agree with you and wouldn't get involved, but they seem to have an arsenal of "weapons" against accusations.

Why don't you let them take the heat and face the accusation properly (with this big red banner on top) and then let's see how they react?

When you oppose the flag you don't give a real chance to the OP to get this issue resolved.

And that's what hypocrisy is - the practice of claiming to have moral standards but in practice you have none.

Don't protect the bad guys here, it's not worth it.

[JollyGood]

Where is your evidence to back up your claim that they are "a bunch of crooks"?

The answer does not have to be = SCAM
Each situation should be judged/assessed on its own merit.

With the attitude from SportsBet.io so far and the way they handled this case they got 0 sympathy from me, they are bunch of crooks and nothing more than that.

[neymarjr12]

This was showing in the SportsBet.io official thread:

https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuQNXC65.png&t=615&c=7EABu0C92whsoA

Until LFC_Bitcoin and Nutildah marked they are opposing the flag (hypocrites).

Now the flag was removed from their official thread due to "Insufficient Support".

If you support this accusation please show your support here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2171

Hello! I deposited 70eur to my account and got 370eur after some winnings. After I tried to withdraw for the first time ever and got my withdrawal rejected. I was asked to complete KYC procedure. I sent my local (Russian) passport and bank statement. After that I was asked to complete KYC using Veriff, where I took a picture with my international passport. After a few days security department asked me if I have any other account, which I actually just do not need. After I answered and waited some more days they asked if I know some other players and sent me their accounts (nicknames), which I saw for the first time because I didn’t know any other guys who use their service. After I answered they told that i am trying to launder money and that they will only send my deposit back. I am really angry because they blocked my account and I didn’t receive my winnings! HELP ME PLEASE!

Well, welcome to the club... Maybe the thing is in our nationatility? I'm Russian as well...

[AB de Royse777]

I'm Russian as well...

LOL! I did not know where neymarjr12 was from, until now :-D

[Get-Paid.com]

Where is your evidence to back up your claim that they are "a bunch of crooks"?

I already mentioned it. Their attitude.
They are ignoring claims here. Look how they deliberately ignore neymarjr's requests but happy to push their business as if everything is as usual.

In addition - they now have 2 claims against them.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5265366.0

Thirdly - they are asking for way too much KYC and verification and what's not - whilst good operators such as Stake, Roobet and others - you don't even hear 1 single claim about it. How come?!

Do the math.

They are digging themselves a hole, and that's what crooks do - you gotta be blind if you can't see where this is all going to end from here.

[neymarjr12]

LFC_Bitcoin and Nutildah marked they are opposing the flag (hypocrites).

How does opposing the flag make me a hypocrite?

I would be a hypocrite if I said "I think Sportsbet is cheating neymarjr12" and then I opposed the flag.

What it boils down to is, as things currently stand, I take their word over neymarjr12's. However, if more evidence were to manifest itself in favor of the accuser or against Sportsbet, then I could withdraw my opposition or potentially even support the flag. This seems highly unlikely, partially based on what the wording of the flag entails, but I remain open minded on the subject.

What evidence from me do you need?

[suchmoon]

Except this happened because

No. Your support for the flag counts only for you because no one has you in their trust list. So again, for most people the flag did not have +3 support.

You realize if you remove your opposition then the big red banner would be back to show up in the official thread of SportsBet.io ?

Again, only for you and perhaps a few more people who support it. Not for most users. Please stop posting nonsense for a few minutes and go read up on flags: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5153344.0

[neymarjr12]

I'm Russian as well...

LOL!
I hope we do get accused of nepotism :-P

To all who are in this conversation, I did not know where neymarjr12 was from, until now :-D

It's not like it is a secret, nobody actually asked

[sportsbet.io]

Hi guys,

After receiving some advice from trusted and experience BTC talk members, it has been decided that there will be one last release of information from sportsbet.io

A couple of senior members have offered their time to review the case. I appreciate them reaching out to us and I full agree to submit them the information that we have on hand.

They will delibirate and make a decision. From that point on, the matter will be finalised either way.

I appreciate the support we have receieved from some members, and im not surprised by the childish, reptitive, boring and lazy reaction of a couple of people on this thread. there is no doubt that those negative users do not have the best interests of BTCTalk threads at heart and are just trying to cash in some way. Please avoid them for your own sanity.

The majority of the BTCTalk community have been instumental in our growth here at sportsbet.io and we continue to have you on board in the very far future!

the last submission of this case will start in the next short while, please be patient and wait for the senior members of this forum to make a decision on the matter.

All the best guys,

regards,

Steve.
sportsbet.io

[neymarjr12]

Hi guys,

After receiving some advice from trusted and experience BTC talk members, it has been decided that there will be one last release of information from sportsbet.io

A couple of senior members have offered their time to review the case. I appreciate them reaching out to us and I full agree to submit them the information that we have on hand.

They will delibirate and make a decision. From that point on, the matter will be finalised either way.

I appreciate the support we have receieved from some members, and im not surprised by the childish, reptitive, boring and lazy reaction of a couple of people on this thread. there is no doubt that those negative users do not have the best interests of BTCTalk threads at heart and are just trying to cash in some way. Please avoid them for your own sanity.

The majority of the BTCTalk community have been instumental in our growth here at sportsbet.io and we continue to have you on board in the very far future!

the last submission of this case will start in the next short while, please be patient and wait for the senior members of this forum to make a decision on the matter.

All the best guys,

regards,

Steve.
sportsbet.io

Finally!!!! Who those senior members would be?

[AB de Royse777]

Finally!!!! Who those senior members would be?

I can assure you that few users are from the following list of yours:

Thanks for heads up! Updated list:
@Royse777
@LFC_Bitcoin
@efialtis
@buwaytress
@SyGambler
@actmyname
@Trofo

Good luck to you and sportsbet.io

[neymarjr12]

I can assure you that few users are from the following list of yours:

Do you mean that you know who is in the final list?

[AB de Royse777]

Do you mean that you know who is in the final list?

Yes I do. Steve is in contact with me, and I am in contact with some others too. Since mindrust already mentioned his involvement, I have no problem to admit it.

We are in process of how it will be conducted and hopefully we will be able to update you soon. Stay online and just to let you know if you do not have a Telegram then please have one. We may need you but not 100% sure yet.

[adam0991]

Fantastic to see this being re-reviewed by Sportsbet and allowing a 3rd party to review.

Let’s hope it is resolved fairly regardless of the outcome.

[AB de Royse777]

@neymarjr12, can you check your PM. I have a link there for you to join us, and we are waiting for you.

[allyouracid]

This thread is a nice example of a great community working together. Also Sportbet's willingness to sort this issue out by involving the community should be noted.
I hope you guys keep us posted. After all those efforts to get to a solution, and now finally getting close, this would be much appreciated (at least as far as possible, without compromizing either OP's privacy or Sportbet's detection tools).

[asche]

Yes I do. Steve is in contact with me, and I am in contact with some others too. Since mindrust already mentioned his involvement, I have no problem to admit it.

I have no problem in making my involvment public either.


Edit:

We are reviewing the evidence provided from SP (no personal customer information has been disclosed) for the last 5-6 hours to fully understand both SP and neymar's position.

As of now we are still trying to come to an agreement on basic points within the group and working towards a proposal we will communicate to SP & Neymar.

We will keep on it tomorrow and are targetting to get this done by saturday at the latest (our analysis).


Anyway I salute SP's effort to act transparently here. We will do our best to do the same within the limits of SP's and Neymar's requests.

[AjdinS]

New positive trust is given to sportsbet.io by LFC .. this is really bad when an accusation is going on don't add new trust please until solved.

[Get-Paid.com]

New positive trust is given to sportsbet.io by LFC .. this is really bad when an accusation is going on don't add new trust please until solved.

I agree.
The investigation needs to be unbiased and fair, and the fact LFC is expressing his trust and opinion before the investigation is concluded is not a good thing.

[suchmoon]

New positive trust is given to sportsbet.io by LFC .. this is really bad when an accusation is going on don't add new trust please until solved.

I agree.
The investigation needs to be unbiased and fair, and the fact LFC is expressing his trust and opinion before the investigation is concluded is not a good thing.

But of course you trolls trolling your "opinions" here is a good thing LOL.

Take a break, come back Monday, it will be over by then.

[Get-Paid.com]

But of course you trolls trolling your "opinions" here is a good thing LOL.

Take a break, come back Monday, it will be over by then.

Speak on your behalf.

And maybe this case would be over, but whatever sportsbet.io is doing is shady as hell, I wouldn't trust them even if this case gets resolved.

[AB de Royse777]

Take a break, come back Monday, it will be over by then.

For the record the +5 merit for telling this Monday thing :-P

LFC_Bitcoin is mad at me, so I think anything about him from me will offend him, so I stay without comment here :-D

I am starting to hate all these lately but a man gotta do that a man do.

And maybe this case would be over, but whatever sportsbet.io is doing is shady as hell, I wouldn't trust them even if this case gets resolved.

I can assure that SB are fair in their moves so far. Sorry I can not talk much right now about it but I can not accept that SB is doing shady. This is very wrong impression that you have on them.

As suchmoon said, please wait few days until we come up with some conclusion. Please do not make mess around.

[Get-Paid.com]

I can not accept that SB is doing shady. This is very wrong impression that you have on them.

Are you going to do the same thing with this 2nd case?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5265366.0

Whatever you do - at least thank you for being a reasonable voice here who actually does sound reasonable, fair and honest unlike some other forum members here which I honestly don't appreciate and don't care if they've been here for years - honesty for me goes all the way from bottom to top without compromises.

[AB de Royse777]

Are you going to do the same thing with this 2nd case?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5265366.0

Whatever you do - at least thank you for being a reasonable voice here who actually does sound reasonable, fair and honest unlike some other forum members here which I honestly don't appreciate and don't care if they've been here for years - honesty for me goes all the way from bottom to top without compromises.

Thanks for the words. My take is that none of us has bad intension, we speak that we believe and I think it's fine as long as this is not too much harming anyone.

Regarding the topic, please do not expect me to do the same for every thread pops up in the forum. With this case it's just co-incidence but nothing, that does not mean that I do not want to spend much time in the forum affair. I do and I love to but I have my own life too.

I just have a quick look and I see Steve is already taking care of the case (if I am not wrong) and I am sure this will end good. I would like to remind you again that so far we have found Steve is very fair and open with us and not trying to hide anything from us.

Again thanks for your input.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

New positive trust is given to sportsbet.io by LFC .. this is really bad when an accusation is going on don't add new trust please until solved.

Shut the fuck up

[mindrust]

would like to remind you again that so far we have found Steve is very fair and open with us and not trying to hide anything from us.

How is neymarjr doin? :p

Sorry I had to leave all the fun to you guys. I thought we would go through this much quicker. The moment I realized this would take more than a day (as suchmoon stated multiple days, 4? 5?) I was done. Anyway I especially trust royse777's judgement. You don't need me when he is there.

[adam0991]

New positive trust is given to sportsbet.io by LFC .. this is really bad when an accusation is going on don't add new trust please until solved.

Shut the fuck up

I agree with AjdinS, LFC just seems to very ignorant.

As soon as the case is resolved I will remove my support for the flags.

[AB de Royse777]

How is neymarjr doin? :p

Sorry I had to leave all the fun to you guys. I thought we would go through this much quicker. The moment I realized this would take more than a day (as suchmoon stated multiple days, 4? 5?) I was done. Anyway I especially trust royse777's judgement. You don't need me when he is there.

He is doing good too. It's very hard for us to find a conclusion yet, but we are trying our best. I would be fun if you were with us and it seems this will surly take more time.

Thanks for the good words and this reminds me some pastime between us too :-D

Cheers,

[JollyGood]

I see two newbies are out to make comments about you.. it would probably be more fun if they did not hide behind sock-puppets but at least the forum allows those losers to get some of happiness  

New positive trust is given to sportsbet.io by LFC .. this is really bad when an accusation is going on don't add new trust please until solved.

Shut the fuck up

[suchmoon]

Just to set the expectations clearly:

I'm not as nice as Royse777. Since both neymarjr12 and Sportsbet.io agreed to mediation this dispute is essentially resolved once the mediation concludes, one way or another. So anyone still fanning the flames will probably get a nice red note. Don't be that person.

[mindrust]

Just to set the expectations clearly:

I'm not as nice as Royse777. Since both neymarjr12 and Sportsbet.io agreed to mediation this dispute is essentially resolved once the mediation concludes, one way or another. So anyone still fanning the flames will probably get a nice red note. Don't be that person.

I thought red notes were only for bad trading experiences?

[rohang]

New positive trust is given to sportsbet.io by LFC .. this is really bad when an accusation is going on don't add new trust please until solved.

I agree.
The investigation needs to be unbiased and fair, and the fact LFC is expressing his trust and opinion before the investigation is concluded is not a good thing.

Then why did u support the flag ?
Stop being a Hypocrite. Every forum member has their right to support or oppose according to their opinions.
You did the same, yet u call out others for exercising their right. Insane

[suchmoon]

I thought red notes were only for bad trading experiences?

Red trust is for users who are high-risk in trading. Someone continuing to escalate a dispute after binding mediation - high-risk shithead IMO.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Can I ask for the list of users who are involved in this review process?

[JollyGood]

From what I read a list of all participants was not made public.

Having said that I find it extremely peculiar that this type of review/mediation/arbitration is even going on.

Does anybody know of anything like this ever happening before in the forum where a company worth multi-millions of USD$ engaged so deeply with some users to examine various bits of information (without giving away their trade security secrets) to show the alleged victim is actually in breach of their ToS?

It seems the OP (who is the alleged victim) is basically willing to share his KYC and various other information himself because if Sportsbet do it they are in breach of GDPR and various other data protection legislation so could open themselves up for legal action. Part of the claim by Sportsbet is that the OP failed to pass KYC and part of the claim by Sportsbet is the OP had multiple accounts but on both counts they failed to disclose what the reasons for them coming those conclusions were.

Regarding the multiple accounts, Sportsbet claim they applied more of a robust system than just to check the same IP address but for obvious reasons cannot disclose their techniques otherwise fraudsters and scammers will be lining up to sign up and take advantage.

In this post I gave my reasons for not supporting any of the 3 flags against Sportsbet: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5263445.msg54893685#msg54893685

Can I ask for the list of users who are involved in this review process?

[PrimeNumber7]

-

I think the issue of alleged multi-accounting is a red herring. Before the issue of possible multi-accounting is addressed, SB needs to articulate how specifically they were harmed by the OP using multiple accounts. They also need to disclose the total deposits, and the total withdrawals they will allow across all of the accounts they are alleging to belong to the OP.

Without the disclosure of the above information, the OP having multiple accounts does not matter, and I would view the situation as SB using a technalicity to arbitrarily confescate user winnings, and as such, SB would be a high risk to trade with.

I reviewed SB's trust page and found this:

<>


Timeline of events

<>
30.03.2017 – The Client was immediately flagged for suspicious gameplay due rapidly changing gameplay dependant on whether the transaction was confirmed in the blockchain or not.
30.03.2017- 02.04.2017 – The Client continues the suspicious gameplay over the course of 4 deposit/withdraw instances.
02.04.2017 – The Client requested a withdrawal in the sum of 20.6 BTC which was declined by the Operator due to suspicious gameplay.
<>

The above is SB saying they decided to ask to verify a customer's KYC due to possible future double spending aginst them. They specifically did not say that their customer even attempted to double spend any of their deposits, but rather that they believed their customer would attempt to double spend a deposit in the future. They ended up confiscating 6.5 BTC (~$50k at the time). I think it is important to note, they did not KYC verify their customer as soon as they discovered the "suspicious" behavior, but rather started KYC verification after their customer was up ~12 BTC.

I thought red notes were only for bad trading experiences?

Red trust is for users who are high-risk in trading. Someone continuing to escalate a dispute after binding mediation - high-risk shithead IMO.

Being a "high risk shithead" is not the same as being "high-risk in trading".

If someone offers to mediate a dispute, and the mediation is unable to offer an explanation that is satisfactory to observers, there is no reason why an observer should be obligated to accept the outcome of said mediation. This is even true for the OP, unless he has explicitly agreed the outcome of the mediation is binding, which I have not seen evidence of. It is not uncommon for parties involved in a dispute to engage in non-binding mediation to try to resolve disputes; sometimes it is successful, but oftentimes it is not.

[Get-Paid.com]

Then why did u support the flag ?
Stop being a Hypocrite. Every forum member has their right to support or oppose according to their opinions.
You did the same, yet u call out others for exercising their right. Insane

If it was 2 individuals arguing about something then you'd be right.
But it's a giant operation against a tiny small ant - so "protecting" the ant is the right thing to do.

They are the ones withholding funds and they are the ones who've done it already twice this week - at least according to what was posted in Bitcointalk (perhaps some other users who experienced the same are not even aware they can post this here).

I have 0 sympathy towards SportsBet.io, zero ... there are other operators like Stake and Roobet who have 0 complaints against them because they simply don't withhold winnings like crooks.

I would view the situation as SB using a technalicity to arbitrarily confescate user winnings, and as such, SB would be a high risk to trade with.

You're right, that's how I view it exactly.
There are too many red flags here.

And you're right about this way of resolving this case - what about the 2nd case that was raised? (some members said they won't have time for another one).

This is unprofessional and uncalled for.

And yet I'm taking the fire for being on the defensive here - I'm defending FUTURE customers that would come here and complain about the same - because it doesn't look like SportsBet.io would change the way they operate.

What kind of casino or gambling website is asking you if you're related to these and these accounts?!?!

If there is FRAUD - block and kick out the user!

If not - then stop being a crook and pay up!

SIMPLE!

[glider101]

I dont believe this is still ongoing now over what.  1/4 a bitcoin?

I have 0 sympathy towards SportsBet.io, zero ... there are other operators like Stake and Roobet who have 0 complaints against them because they simply don't withhold winnings like crooks.

You are truly biased and not making things any better

Unlike Sportsbet.io that has a real and valid accusation against them - Roobet.com is clean and 100% honest.

We are proud promoting Roobet.com in our sites and we are against cheating websites like Sportsbet.io (and their sister site BitCasino.io) - we know how to say kudos to others when it's necessary, and we know when it's time for criticism but Roobet is 100% honest and unlike its competitors it doesn't cheat its users.

All sportsbook have FUD written about them

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=stake.com+scam

What about Yahoo's case?  -    https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5206650.0
That man went though hell and back to get his winningss   Its not just  sportsbet, wake the fuck up alreadsy??

[Get-Paid.com]

What about Yahoo's case?  -    https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5206650.0
That man went though hell and back to get his winningss   Its not just  sportsbet, wake the fuck up alreadsy??

That wasn't a case of fraud, it was a case where they didn't stipulate the maximum profit properly.
This is understandable and since then Roobet hasn't caused any further issues as far as I know (please don't underestimate I don't read posts in the forum!)

A genuine mistake is not the same as withholding your funds for some clause from the ToS that sounds unscrupulous.

Sorry but you really can't compare between the two.

[glider101]

how do you explain this!
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=stake.com+scam
you say its only sportsbet but i am saying its all big casinos

[glider101]

you are clearly accepting money to work for other casinos.  so your words shouldnt be taken with much worth.   
you are biased and only here for your financial reasons.

[Get-Paid.com]

you are clearly accepting money to work for other casinos.  so your words shouldnt be taken with much worth.   
you are biased and only here for your financial reasons.

Wrong!
But it's pointless to continue this ridiculous argument.

You're wrong, 100%.

[glider101]

you are clearly accepting money to work for other casinos.  so your words shouldnt be taken with much worth.   
you are biased and only here for your financial reasons.

Wrong!
But it's pointless to continue this ridiculous argument.

You're wrong, 100%.

How about my Google link-  its wrong too?
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=stake.com+scam
Nothing against Stake.com I play there, but it's not only SB who gets accused of such things.  Wake up!!

[Get-Paid.com]

How about my Google link-  its wrong too?
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=stake.com+scam
Nothing against Stake.com I play there, but it's not only SB who gets accused of such things.  Wake up!!

Why do I need to search for results in Google.
Do you have a valid scam accusation from this forum?

And seriously - I don't want to continue the discussion with you.
You're a liar (claiming I work for competitors) and there's no point in talking to liars as you can believe whatever you want to believe.

I work for my businesses and my businesses only and thank god I am not part of the gambling industry, and don't wanna be part of it, ever.

[glider101]

You're a liar (claiming I work for competitors) and there's no point in talking to liars as you can believe whatever you want to believe.

I work for my businesses and my businesses only and thank god I am not part of the gambling industry, and don't wanna be part of it, ever.

We are proud promoting Roobet.com in our sites

You said it not me
So do you promote Roobet on your sites or youre not part of the gambling industry?    Which one cant be both  

[suchmoon]

Being a "high risk shithead" is not the same as being "high-risk in trading".

No, I meant exactly a shithead who is high-risk in trading as evidenced by escalating a dispute after binding mediation. Thanks for trying to explain my words but you're shit at that job so you're fired.

If someone offers to mediate a dispute, and the mediation is unable to offer an explanation that is satisfactory to observers, there is no reason why an observer should be obligated to accept the outcome of said mediation. This is even true for the OP, unless he has explicitly agreed the outcome of the mediation is binding, which I have not seen evidence of. It is not uncommon for parties involved in a dispute to engage in non-binding mediation to try to resolve disputes; sometimes it is successful, but oftentimes it is not.

Some more gobbledygook. Mediation is not for "observers".

[Get-Paid.com]

So do you promote Roobet on your site or youre not part of the gambling industry?    Which one cant be both 

We are promoting them in some of our faucet sites, that's correct.
What's wrong with that?

How's that turning us into ones "who work for them"? We don't work for them, we promote them because they pay us for an ad space. We could care less about all the rest.

How is all this related to SportsBet.io? Are you claiming we want Roobet.com to succeed and SportsBet.io to fail and that's why the posts are made here?
Let's take that theory forward,
If anything, at all - we should be bashing BitCasino.io, the sister website of SportsBet.io - because Roobet is doing casino games only with no sports -

So let's put things straight:

My personal complaint against SportsBet.io is simple - they are withholding user funds and they do it for unscrupulous reasons.
Why do I go against them? Because I don't appreciate what they do to their users, accusing them of multi-account-users and dealing with it unprofessionally.

Do I get any benefit from doing so? No.
In fact I've wasted too much of my precious time on this.

I want people and businesses to play fair, and that's what I fight for...

Here's another example for you:

I had a Skype conversation with George from CloudBet maybe a year ago or so, he asked me to promote their website - initially we did, but when I discovered how CloudBet is scamming their users I asked George for an explanation - when I saw this is not getting resolved I shut the door and told him - no thanks, no more promoting your business.

And if you search the history you can see I made posts in CloudBets threads as well.

I don't like it when people don't play fair, that's all... especially especially when it comes to gambling.

So sorry - whatever theory you wanna come up with is not going to work for you simply because I am telling you the truth who I am and why I do this.

Now,

Can we stop all this nonsense and let's see how this (specific) case gets resolved? I have no interest in continuing the discussion with you.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Get-Paid.com

Bro, it’d be a good idea for you to step away from this now. You’re digging yourself a hole, deeper & deeper. It’s clear what your intentions are as you’ve been caught working for a rival.

Step away from this thread & all discussion about the case (I include myself in that). It’s being dealt with by reputable members & the findings will be revealed in a few days. This saga doesn’t need people like yourself stirring the pot. Leave it to the guys who’ve been chosen to deal with it.

You’re very close to getting red trust from suchmoon. I suggest from now nobody posts in this thread unless you’re directly involved in the investigation because none of the rest of us are going to add anything constructive.


Anybody who responds to this thread who isn’t directly involved in the investigation after my post is at the risk of receiving negative trust

[glider101]

We are proud promoting Roobet.com in our sites

We are promoting them in some of our faucet sites, that's correct.
What's wrong with that?

thank god I am not part of the gambling industry, and don't wanna be part of it, ever.

I made them letters big enough for you and I am done with arguing with a liar  like you.

[suchmoon]

the findings will be revealed in a few days

Or not even that. There is no plausible solution to this debacle that I could imagine satisfying every troll and TBH it's none of anyone's business except neymarjr12 and Sportsbet. If they choose to share any info that's fine, if not - we have to accept that and move on.

[Steamtyme]

Anybody who responds to this thread who isn’t directly involved in the investigation after my post is at the risk of receiving negative trust

Do not do that. That is extremely poor judgement to begin threatening people with Negative feedback for posting/trolling in a thread. Exclude and ignore them all you want... myself included if that's how you feel, but let's not degrade ourselves and the feedback system.

Just to set the expectations clearly:
I'm not as nice as Royse777. Since both neymarjr12 and Sportsbet.io agreed to mediation this dispute is essentially resolved once the mediation concludes, one way or another. So anyone still fanning the flames will probably get a nice red note. Don't be that person.

Come on. You know that's a neutral at best. It's a comment on them as an individual and their posting/trolling. Unless it is Neymarjr. or sportsbet.io you plan to tag for carrying on afterwards. Then it could be seen as a trade dispute and relevant to a warning about transacting with them.

Not going to lie I was pretty opposed to this idea of a "Jury of mediators". Not that I don't trust/respect most of your judgement most of the time, it just seemed like a forced scenario. I had a minor exchange with sportsbet  after the decision had already been made to go ahead with this - I was unaware of that and we started talking about something different - My suggestion was for them to seek out that Askgamblers.com themselves and see if they would hear the case from that point.

I see this as precedent setting where individuals might see this as the new accepted method to demand answers from the backend of a company. Just my opinion. H

[mindrust]

BitcoinTALK-PROTECT

The best investigators money can buy! We will cross examine the shit out of you, the suspect and even each other.

"Don't trust verify."

[JollyGood]

Come on. You know that's a neutral at best. It's a comment on them as an individual and their posting/trolling. Unless it is Neymarjr. or sportsbet.io you plan to tag for carrying on afterwards. Then it could be seen as a trade dispute and relevant to a warning about transacting with them.

Not going to lie I was pretty opposed to this idea of a "Jury of mediators". Not that I don't trust/respect most of your judgement most of the time, it just seemed like a forced scenario. I had a minor exchange with sportsbet  after the decision had already been made to go ahead with this - I was unaware of that and we started talking about something different - My suggestion was for them to seek out that Askgamblers.com themselves and see if they would hear the case from that point.

I cannot advocate for a process such as this where forum members are asked to arbitrate or give a judgement on matters such as these. As the Askgamblers.com website is there to rule on things such as this, why was that route not taken instead?

I see this as precedent setting where individuals might see this as the new accepted method to demand answers from the backend of a company. Just my opinion. H

My sentiments exactly, I already stated that this could be start of a very dangerous precedent where it is the new norm of a route that anybody making an allegation can ask to go down and expect it to happen.

[mindrust]

I cannot advocate for a process such as this where forum members are asked to arbitrate or give a judgement on matters such as these. As the Askgamblers.com website is there to rule on things such as this, why was that route not taken instead?

Askgamblers.com refused to look into it.

Also, wtf is askgamblers and why should we trust them? And how do you know they are not getting paychecks from the casinos?

I'd rather trust the forum members.

[JollyGood]

Thank you for mentioning that askgamblers.com refused to look in to this, upon checking through the posts I think it was related to them citing it was a breach of ToS and they do not arbitrate in those disputes but someone please correct me if I am wrong.

I just looked at their website, askgamblers.com their website is full of affiliate links so that clearly could be a matter of conflict of interest. I mean, if the ruled against a casino and in favour of a user to the tune of say $10,000 or $50,000 or more, I do not see many casinos taking a massive financial hit and still allowing askgamblers.com to earn off them. Just by looking at their website I would class them as unsuitable for making any sort of ruling via arbitration.

As for trusting forum members, without even knowing exactly which users are supposed to be participating in this scam allegation against Sportsbet, I would only trust those forum members that I trust. By the way you are on my trust list  

Askgamblers.com refused to look into it.

Also, wtf is askgamblers and why should we trust them? And how do you know they are not getting paychecks from the casinos?

I'd rather trust the forum members.

[suchmoon]

Come on. You know that's a neutral at best. It's a comment on them as an individual and their posting/trolling. Unless it is Neymarjr. or sportsbet.io you plan to tag for carrying on afterwards. Then it could be seen as a trade dispute and relevant to a warning about transacting with them.

I don't have a problem with comments and opinions. I would have a problem with someone saying e.g. "This proves that Sportsbet are scammers" or "neymarjr12 scammed Sportsbet" after mediation. That's like presenting fake proof that Steamtyme scammed suchmoon.

Not going to lie I was pretty opposed to this idea of a "Jury of mediators". Not that I don't trust/respect most of your judgement most of the time, it just seemed like a forced scenario. I had a minor exchange with sportsbet  after the decision had already been made to go ahead with this - I was unaware of that and we started talking about something different - My suggestion was for them to seek out that Askgamblers.com themselves and see if they would hear the case from that point.

I see this as precedent setting where individuals might see this as the new accepted method to demand answers from the backend of a company. Just my opinion. H

I'm quite sure that if the mediators do their job properly, the probability of anyone willing to submit to mediation again is very very low.

[actmyname]

I'm quite sure that if the mediators do their job properly, the probability of anyone willing to submit to mediation again is very very low.

Explains why my lawyer always bungles about and wastes time. Efficient workers don't get to max out their hours!

[Rigor1899]

I have the same situation. And I'm Russian as well! Apparently it really is a fraud with those who are unavailable to push the situation on large gambling forums!


Btw @neymarjr12
Could you enable receiving messages from newbies at bitcointalk.org?)

[hacker1001101001]

I thought red notes were only for bad trading experiences?

Red trust is for users who are high-risk in trading. Someone continuing to escalate a dispute after binding mediation - high-risk shithead IMO.

What an tone ! Piss off with your logic.

Can I ask for the list of users who are involved in this review process?

+1, who are this mediators ?

It's really extremely rare, if you want to find unbiased and neutral user's here.

[Get-Paid.com]

I have the same situation. And I'm Russian as well! Apparently it really is a fraud with those who are unavailable to push the situation on large gambling forums!


Btw @neymarjr12
Could you enable receiving messages from newbies at bitcointalk.org?)

Please post your issue in a new topic and follow the guidelines so your issue can get a proper attention.

[nutildah]

I'm not as nice as Royse777. Since both neymarjr12 and Sportsbet.io agreed to mediation this dispute is essentially resolved once the mediation concludes, one way or another. So anyone still fanning the flames will probably get a nice red note. Don't be that person.

Come on. You know that's a neutral at best. It's a comment on them as an individual and their posting/trolling.

The exact criteria for a red tag comes down to this:

You think that trading with this person is high-risk.

This definitely could signify somebody posting with less than honest intentions. Not sure why anybody would trade with an obvious throwaway sockpuppet account in the first place, but that doesn't preclude the warranting of a tag.

[Steamtyme]

I don't have a problem with comments and opinions. I would have a problem with someone saying e.g. "This proves that Sportsbet are scammers" or "neymarjr12 scammed Sportsbet" after mediation. That's like presenting fake proof that Steamtyme scammed suchmoon.

That is having a problem with peoples opinions which they comment after they draw conclusions from the findings/ruling of this arbitration.
We can't change the way people think or perceive this outcome. Either way once a decision is reached people will view someone as a bad actor and will likely speak out about it. That or they will go around tagging accounts if thy feel strongly enough about it.

Wait wait wait why am I the scammer. I have nice things... maybe you wanted my, um okay never mind. In this case though if we went to arbitration over say me shorting you some satoshis, b/c we didn't agree who covers fees. This goes to an arbitrator and they decide I was being a dick and trying to short you. People have every right to tell me how shitty I am, or to say they disagree with the ruling. Their opinion and voicing it shouldn't carry the threat of being negatively tagged. You may want to note how they viewed the case as their opinions don't align with your and tag them neutrally. The note is there but there is no punishment for an opinion and a comment.

See below where if it escalates, it could possibly enter the realm of acceptable.

The exact criteria for a red tag comes down to this:

You think that trading with this person is high-risk.

No it comes down to this.

The system is for handling trade risk, not for flagging people for good/bad posts/personalities/ideas.
~snip~
 - Leave negative ratings if you actively think that trading with the person is less safe than with a random person.
 - Unstable behavior could very occasionally be an acceptable reason for leaving negative trust, but if it looks like you're leaving negative trust due to personal disagreements, then that's inappropriate. Ratings are not for popularity contests, virtue signalling, punishing people for your idea of wrongthink, etc.

I would not consider drawing conclusions from the ruling of an arbitrated dispute to be unstable behavior. So again unless these posters are simultaneously acting in bad faith regarding Trades/Services, I advocate for neutral tags to note  opinions on their behavior/opinions/posts.

That or we could start tagging people for typos and grammar. They could mess up the terms which makes them a risk to trade with.

That's my piece and the more I wrote I feel I needed to end it with this. I try not to tell people how to do things and seem to be having a harder time of it lately. This is my opinion, take it for that.  It's your feedback use it as you will, but there are guidelines.

[nutildah]

The exact criteria for a red tag comes down to this:

You think that trading with this person is high-risk.

No it comes down to this.

The system is for handling trade risk, not for flagging people for good/bad posts/personalities/ideas.
~snip~
 - Leave negative ratings if you actively think that trading with the person is less safe than with a random person.
 - Unstable behavior could very occasionally be an acceptable reason for leaving negative trust, but if it looks like you're leaving negative trust due to personal disagreements, then that's inappropriate. Ratings are not for popularity contests, virtue signalling, punishing people for your idea of wrongthink, etc.

I would not consider drawing conclusions from the ruling of an arbitrated dispute to be unstable behavior. So again unless these posters are simultaneously acting in bad faith regarding Trades/Services, I advocate for neutral tags to note  opinions on their behavior/opinions/posts.

That or we could start tagging people for typos and grammar. They could mess up the terms which makes them a risk to trade with.

That's my piece and the more I wrote I feel I needed to end it with this. I try not to tell people how to do things and seem to be having a harder time of it lately. This is my opinion, take it for that.  It's your feedback use it as you will, but there are guidelines.

What I quoted and what you quoted signify the same thing. You're leaping to conclude that the ratings would necessarily be based on personal disagreements when this isn't the case.

Stretching out the argument out to include red tags for "typos and grammar" serves no purpose -- you're headed down the straw man path which is counterproductive to discussion of the issue at hand.

The actual disagreement between us is whether or not the trust system should be used proactively. You're entitled to your opinion on that matter, but to assume contrary opinions necessarily fall into the basket of wanting to use red trust to punish people for disagreeing with them is a stretch.

[Steamtyme]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5221908.new#new

We can stop going off topic in this thread. I will not be responding to this line of discussion on appropriate use of the trust system in this thread any further. All future discussion if any can take place in an appropriate topic, as I replied there.

[adam0991]

Is there any progress on resolving this case yet? It can’t be that complicated

[Trofo]

Can I ask for the list of users who are involved in this review process?

+1, who are this mediators ?

It's really extremely rare, if you want to find unbiased and neutral user's here.

I don't mind admitting I am one of the mediators. I did not want to be one and I cautioned all interested parties that I believe this isn't the best way to resolve this case but agreed to do it if they want to go down that road. For now we have decided to stay somewhat anonymous but that may change in the future, or not.

This case has proven to be extremely hard on us and I (nor anyone else) will not share any details here before final decision is reached. I have already lost 10+ hours on this case and some guys have lost even more. We are getting nothing from this and in the end we will have to disappoint one of the disputing parties.

Both Sportsbet and Neymar have agreed to our mediation and accepted that our decision is final, so any more writing in this topic can not help either of them. We are in constant communication with both of them and they will be the first to know our decision as it should be. I guess it will be than made publicly in this topic as well.

Is there any progress on resolving this case yet? It can’t be that complicated

It is quite complicated when you realise your decision is final and you don't want to make mistakes. We have put the deadline on end of Saturday, so I guess results should be known by then.

[JollyGood]

Lawyers eh.. who needs them 

Back to this topic, will Sportsbet try to do this every time someone comes along and asks for it? Will other casinos follow suit?

Explains why my lawyer always bungles about and wastes time. Efficient workers don't get to max out their hours!

[mindrust]

Back to this topic, will Sportsbet try to do this every time someone comes along and asks for it? Will other casinos follow suit?

If they make a satisfactory public statement about these issues, they won't have to I believe.

All they had to do was explaining these two points:

1- How is neymarjr a multiaccounter?
2- Why didn't his KYC pass. (Fake/Forged documents? Impostor? Missing docs?)

It was as simple as that.

Or...

People will know that your winnings is not really your winnings at sportsbet.io.

This information doesn't have to be known via flags. (Maybe it does?) I am not sure which one would be the more appropriate way but I guess even a neutral trust rating would do the trick but It will be known regardless.

Another funny thought:

If you were a newbie reading the casino's trust ratings and it was this positive rating you were reading...

"This casino does arbitrarily not pay their players' winnings"

What would you do? Would you take this rating as a posivite or negative one? 

[HCP]

BitcoinTALK-PROTECT

You owe me a new keyboard... and a beer! 

gets my vote for Post of the week!

[JollyGood]

In my opinion if Sportsbet explain how user neymarjr12 has multi-accounts then they might compromise their algorithm so for me that is something they should not necessarily make public.

As for the KYC failing, I think they should have explained to neymarjr12 exactly why it failed their checks and then it was up to neymarjr12 to explain why it failed because Sportsbet are falling under UK data protection laws and also European GDPR therefore they should not make any information public (because they could be target for litigation) but give as much as they can to neymarjr12 then let him make it public.

Even with all the discussion that has taken place in this thread I cannot support the flags against Sportsbet for reasons stated here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5263445.msg54893685#msg54893685

The only issue I have with Sportsbet is the fact they allow deposits to take place and allow bets to take place even though their algorithm flags the user - by this I can only conclude Sportsbet are happy to keep the funds if the user loses.

The problem arises when the user wins and maybe wins big, then Sportsbet can go through the history of the user account and show total funds deposited vs total amount won and then use any amount they want to settle the issue by saying they have a right to withhold winnings. Though that might be their right under their ToS it is morally incorrect and morally indefensible if they allow users they deem to be fraudsters to deposit money so they can keep it if the user loses but decide where or not to confiscate his funds if he wins.

Sportsbet are not the only casino to operate like this, too many casinos do it and it is a practice that really needs to change. Too many exchanges are doing the same thing but using KYC or other excuses to freeze funds.

Back to this topic, will Sportsbet try to do this every time someone comes along and asks for it? Will other casinos follow suit?

If they make a satisfactory public statement about these issues, they won't have to I believe.

All they had to do was explaining these two points:

1- How is neymarjr a multiaccounter?
2- Why didn't his KYC pass. (Fake/Forged documents? Impostor? Missing docs?)

It was as simple as that.

Or...

People will know that your winnings is not really your winnings at sportsbet.io.

This information doesn't have to be known via flags. (Maybe it does?) I am not sure which one would be the more appropriate way but I guess even a neutral trust rating would do the trick but It will be known regardless.

[Rigor1899]

I have the same situation. And I'm Russian as well! Apparently it really is a fraud with those who are unavailable to push the situation on large gambling forums!


Btw @neymarjr12
Could you enable receiving messages from newbies at bitcointalk.org?)

Please post your issue in a new topic and follow the guidelines so your issue can get a proper attention.

Actually I will

[hacker1001101001]

Can I ask for the list of users who are involved in this review process?

+1, who are this mediators ?

It's really extremely rare, if you want to find unbiased and neutral user's here.

I don't mind admitting I am one of the mediators.

Looks fine overall, won't bother with names like you, Royse777 or asche. I hope the weaker side is not taken advantage of, as it's clear that there are highly trusted biased users posting in this thread itself. Some of them even threatening with trust abuse if the right thing is spoken.

Just to set the expectations clearly:

I'm not as nice as Royse777. Since both neymarjr12 and Sportsbet.io agreed to mediation this dispute is essentially resolved once the mediation concludes, one way or another. So anyone still fanning the flames will probably get a nice red note. Don't be that person.

Anybody who responds to this thread who isn’t directly involved in the investigation after my post is at the risk of receiving negative trust

[JollyGood]

Did neymarjr12 give a wallet address in the end or will that happen later? Sportsbet have asked for it on at least 5 occasions that I know of but the OP making the allegation refuses to give it.

My experience with Sportsbet.io has been positive. Signature campaign payouts are always there, and I've been betting from time to time on their website with no issues. It seems irrational to me that a reputable website would scam someone. Clearly, it is not in their interest to lose reputation, customers and profits. And Sportsbet.io is ready to return the deposit (minus withdrawals) to the person who claims he was scammed. I understand why Sportsbet.io would not share how they linked the accounts as making this info public would help abusers to find new ways of breaking the rules.
It's a difficult case for sure, but it's not clear to me why neymarjr12 refuses to provide the address for the return of the deposit at least.
I also support the idea of buwaytress about using the reputable third party to close the case.

[AB de Royse777]

Did neymarjr12 give a wallet address in the end or will that happen later?

A summary of the case will be posted very soon. Please be patient.

Cheers,

[Trofo]

The mediators between Sportsbet and neymarjr12 have managed to arrive at a unanimous decision, which resulted in a successful undisclosed settlement between both parties. The dispute is now closed, with all future rights to claims on this dispute waived.

All trust and flags initiated have also been removed as part of mediation terms; we recommend users review any support/opposition based on the outcome of this mediation.

Our closing words on the matter
This mediation should be seen as a highly irregular occurrence for bitcointalk. The list of mediators was prepared from the list given by both sportsbet and neymarjr12. We note Sportsbet's willingness to submit to the chosen list of mediators displays their trust in the community and its intent to continue its relationship with them in the future. neymarjr12's willingness to submit to the same also points to the clout this forum wields.

However, despite being identified as being well-placed to mediate, we have now learnt that in such cases, claims of Terms of Service (ToS) breach are virtually impossible to prove or disprove beyond dispute via remote mediation.

We would urge gamblers to read and comply with the terms of gambling sites and not use sites that have conditions they find unfavorable to their gambling preferences. This mediation process should be seen as a rare exception and not as a routine dispute resolution process. Gamble responsibly.

[PrimeNumber7]

The mediators between Sportsbet and neymarjr12 have managed to arrive at a unanimous decision, which resulted in a successful undisclosed settlement between both parties. The dispute is now closed, with all future rights to claims on this dispute waived.

Good job in being transparent.

I hope the OP can say he is happy with the outcome, but I would say that this is not something that inspires confidence.