Should we not get negative feedback for expressing our views? How about me?

[Stalker22]

~
I was considering red-trusting anyone who supported/opposed the flag with knowledge that you're paying for that but I'll probably just tilde them instead.

Note that some members supported/opposed the flag before he created that topic or, in my case, after deadline expired for his "giveaway". For example, I think examplens opposed the flag before but was paid nonetheless. Of course, with "cursed" coins.

You instantly dismiss anyone who does not support your "cause" right away as "nonsense talkers" or "paid promoters". How can you ever expect to be taken seriously when you are so incredibly set in your ways while refusing to listen to anyone else?

That's because this is my conclusion, after talking about my case for a few months here. And this is payment issue not nonsense talk issue, so what matters is payment (that is going to happen, but you're just not helping).

You can call me a "nonsense talker" if you want, I don't care, but I'll express my opinion anyway. As LoyceV said, it's hard to decide which side to be on. The terms are not in your favor, but these were the terms, and you agreed to them when you signed up. There is no point in accusing the casino of enforcing their own terms that are clearly stated on the site.
On the other hand, such unfavorable terms and the fact that they should not have accepted your bets are not in the casino's favor. However, gamblers are free to choose the casino they wish to gamble on. If you do not like their terms, just move on to another casino.

[1715513765]

1715513765

[1715513765]

1715513765

[1715513765]

1715513765

[suchmoon]

~
I was considering red-trusting anyone who supported/opposed the flag with knowledge that you're paying for that but I'll probably just tilde them instead.

Note that some members supported/opposed the flag before he created that topic or, in my case, after deadline expired for his "giveaway". For example, I think examplens opposed the flag before but was paid nonetheless. Of course, with "cursed" coins.

I know, and I may not do even that after all, since it's not easy to determine when exactly someone supported or opposed the flag and what their state of mind was at that time.

Not that it matters much. My exclusions don't affect DT at default settings. Users with custom trust lists surely would know how to deal with any changes they don't like.

[LoyceV]

I may not do even that after all, since it's not easy to determine when exactly someone supported or opposed the flag and what their state of mind was at that time.

That's probably for the best. I can think of (far fetched) ways to abuse this too: punishing someone for "voting" on a Flag can stop people from doing so. Then again, offering money can do that too: some people will vote, but others will be more reluctant because of the payment being offered.

I have seen companies pay for review.

Thoroughly reviewing a scam accusation takes a lot of time, and I considered this more or less a compensation for the time spent. But there's no checking if someone even read the scam accusation, and usually companies who pay for a review want to know for sure users actually tested it.

[examplens]

~
I was considering red-trusting anyone who supported/opposed the flag with knowledge that you're paying for that but I'll probably just tilde them instead.

Note that some members supported/opposed the flag before he created that topic or, in my case, after deadline expired for his "giveaway". For example, I think examplens opposed the flag before but was paid nonetheless. Of course, with "cursed" coins.

I know, and I may not do even that after all, since it's not easy to determine when exactly someone supported or opposed the flag and what their state of mind was at that time.

Yes, I did oppose that flag even when there was a current discussion about the case. At the time, I didn't even think there could be a financial reward for it.
When OP ^@PaperWallet announces a reward for all who support/oppose that flag, I didn't want to withdraw my vote because that would be the direct impact of the payment (in this case avoiding participation in its contest) on my decision.
I hope I don't have to withdraw my vote from this flag because of the potential red trust.

As for the prize itself here, I received an unexpected +0.001429 BTC at some point to address from my profile. I believe it is a transaction by PaperWallet. I didn't want to deepen the story and feed his trolling and any further pointless discussion about "cursed" coins.

Though if I look at everything a little better, when we talk about "cursed" coins, maybe he is right after all. the coins he sent, however, have some negative history.
OP (PaperWallet) sent all rewards from address bc1q53dxta9y3kzlnwxsxp2h7j5tehjrqk4hrg3ak9 through this transaction but all funds are moved from 3JodN7GmkHdPgKj9G7HCkn9NDLhrcWCjVN address.

Sounds like everything is legit, except that 3JodN7GmkHdPgKj9G7HCkn9NDLhrcWCjVN address, is already recognised as used in Crypto Clipboard Malware scam https://hashxp.org/address/3JodN7GmkHdPgKj9G7HCkn9NDLhrcWCjVN

I did not ask for this money, nor did I expect anything from there, I decided what to do with him. no, I will not return it to PaperWallet, I just don't want to play his stupid games.
An amount of 0.001429 BTC I will transfer to FortuneJack casino, to trying my luck with "cursed" coins.

[PaperWallet]

Yes, I did oppose that flag even when there was a current discussion about the case. At the time, I didn't even think there could be a financial reward for it.
When OP ^@PaperWallet announces a reward for all who support/oppose that flag, I didn't want to withdraw my vote

I am 98% certain that this person is lying.

Is there an admin who could verify when @examplens opposed my flag? The time at which people reacted to my flag is not on the flag. I still remember this person posting in my giveaway thread 3 days after it started saying "oh I remember this flag from back then, and if I remember correctly..." and he was a brand new reaction to my flag AFTER the giveaway was started. This would be lying about something related to transactions and he would deserve a red flag for it if my assumptions are true.

Though if I look at everything a little better, when we talk about "cursed" coins, maybe he is right after all. the coins he sent, however, have some negative history.
[.....]
Sounds like everything is legit, except that 3JodN7GmkHdPgKj9G7HCkn9NDLhrcWCjVN address, is already recognised as used in Crypto Clipboard Malware scam https://hashxp.org/address/3JodN7GmkHdPgKj9G7HCkn9NDLhrcWCjVN

Don't give bogus links, you're misleading people who read your posts. If you look at the address, it's very clear it belongs to a big crypto business. Actually it belongs to this business: https://coinspaid.com

If you opposed my flag in good conscience, you have nothing to worry about since God will not listen to my curse. But this is unlikely the case with any person who checked my case thoroughly and has some integrity

[Z-tight]

This would be lying about something related to transactions and he would deserve a red flag for it if my assumptions are true.

No, your assumptions are not true, no member is at risk of doing business (trading) with examplens whether he did support or oppose your flag, or whenever he did so.

[PaperWallet]

This would be lying about something related to transactions and he would deserve a red flag for it if my assumptions are true.

No, your assumptions are not true, no member is at risk of doing business (trading) with examplens whether he did support or oppose your flag, or whenever he did so.

Don't change the meaning of what I said bastard of bad faith, because you're also lying when you say that my assumptions are not true and I'm certain they are. My assumption is that examplens has lied about his participation in my giveaway and about how he got 1.4 mBTC from me. You know nothing about when he participated in my giveaway.

Can an administrator verify please when did @examplens oppose my flag. This is a serious issue since this person is lying about a participation in a scam accusation flag and about how he ended up getting money for opposing my flag.

[The Cryptovator]

The title is quite different from your post. Expressing an opinion shouldn't get a red tag if your opinion is constructive. But if your opinion or expression supports scammers or somehow abuses the forum trust system then you may get a tag. In your case seems you tried to manipulate the flag system by a giveaway. And definitely, this is an abuse of the trust system. Everyone is free to oppose or support. But it should be free of cost, not paid anyway.

[Stalker22]

Can an administrator verify please when did @examplens oppose my flag. This is a serious issue since this person is lying about a participation in a scam accusation flag and about how he ended up getting money for opposing my flag.

I doubt the administrator will bother with such unimportant things.

You are clearly misleading and manipulating. This is not a "serious issue" since anyone who is anyone on this forum knows that examplens is a respectable member. As for his reaction on the flag, I believe his words because the evidence speaks in his favor.

This is his comment in the original scam accusation thread:

They definitely did not introduce these rules just because of this case. I found these same rules in the screenshot on the web archive from 12. May 2020. Everything seems to be fine on their part and they have protected themselves from such situations in time. we may not like this rule, but it is set that way.

https://web.archive.org/web/20200512020750/https://fortunejack.com/faq/sportsbook

And I am still waiting for my cashout to be paid.

did you intentionally make four identical bets or its happen accidentally?
also whether perhaps the reason was that all wins be below 100k eur?

Based on this, it is obvious that he opposed your flag back then, and I am 100% certain that you are lying.

[LoyceV]

~

Based on this, it is obvious that he opposed your flag back then

He couldn't have Opposed it last year, the Flag was created on 2022-05-08. Unfortunately, I stopped daily updates for my Trust Flag viewer, so I can't tell on which day the Flag was Opposed.

[PaperWallet]

I doubt the administrator will bother with such unimportant things.

Don’t worry, I’ll make it important for you.
Don’t try to minimize the deception that is in the « trust » of your casino scam promoter group.

Based on this, it is obvious that he opposed your flag back then, and I am 100% certain that you are lying.

100%. Ok, let’s see what happens when a professional nonsense talker is challenged. Let’s bet 0.1 BTC each that if we can find some proof @examplens has opposed the flag before my giveaway for you, and after for me. I’ll let you freeroll me again like fortunejack did no problem, I guess this is perfectly fine within the casinos you promote. Would you like to take it? Or you can continue your professional nonsense talk, no problem.

@Loyce there must be a way to know on the bitcointalk server no? On the other hand, if you’ve worked out so hard on the trust system that the best of it that came out of are @examplens and @FortuneJack, what a waste of talent. You can get much better results elsewhere.

[LoyceV]

@Loyce there must be a way to know on the bitcointalk server no?

Probably. But I doubt Admin is going to tell you. I couldn't find the exact date on BPIP.org either, and I don't know any other external tools that keep track.

[Stalker22]

~

Based on this, it is obvious that he opposed your flag back then

He couldn't have Opposed it last year, the Flag was created on 2022-05-08. Unfortunately, I stopped daily updates for my Trust Flag viewer, so I can't tell on which day the Flag was Opposed.

Oh, I see. I missed that. Thanks.

Based on this, it is obvious that he opposed your flag back then, and I am 100% certain that you are lying.

100%. Ok, let’s see what happens when a professional nonsense talker is challenged. Let’s bet 0.1 BTC each...
~

I am afraid I will have to disappoint you. Obviously, I was wrong about my previous assessment because I assumed that you created the flag at the same time as the scam accusation. However, I still believe you are manipulating and lying, because of your history of such behavior. So, no, I am not interested in making a deal with you.

[PaperWallet]

I am afraid I will have to disappoint you. Obviously, I was wrong about my previous assessment because I assumed that you created the flag at the same time as the scam accusation. However, I still believe you are manipulating and lying, because of your history of such behavior. So, no, I am not interested in making a deal with you.

Nah come on... You're wrong because you believed your "well respected" friend @examplens, now you know he's lying. And my bet is not about whether he opposed my flag back then. It's just about what you're saying: that he is genuine in saying he opposed my flag before giveaway. All I'm saying is that he is lying. Could you please be more precise in what I am manipulating instead of nonsense talking?

It's amazing how persistent, bold and blatant you are in lying, but no wonder for someone who supports a scam like fortunejack. Just curious, are you American?

@Loyce there must be a way to know on the bitcointalk server no?

Probably. But I doubt Admin is going to tell you. I couldn't find the exact date on BPIP.org either, and I don't know any other external tools that keep track.

It depends. If it is someone who is indifferent towards scam promoters in this forum being given so much high trust scores and being ok with them lying without being checked, fine. If not, maybe it could be a good person who will give us this information. Do you know who can give this information?

[edgycorner]

I played devil's advocate in a maieutic manner and got passionate about it.  Twitchyseal and I took a diametric stance on the matter which resulted in a heated discussion with a few disrespectful remarks by me. It was a series of unfortunate events, driven by our different weltanschauung and my little ego. Twitchyseal is the bigger man in my case, and I owe them an apology.
But your case is very much different. My matter is trivial compared to yours.

I am not going to get involved in another scam accusation.
I will leave you with some advice:  Be respectful. Don't be presumptuous with your opinions about other members. Don't deviate from the subject. Stick to the facts and always be honest. You will garner more support this way if your case is true. Good luck.

[LoyceV]

Do you know who can give this information?

Admins are Cyrus and theymos.

[PaperWallet]

Do you know who can give this information?

Admins are Cyrus and theymos.

Ok thks so it's the admins of this section. I will contact Cyrus.

I played devil's advocate in a maieutic manner and got passionate about it.  Twitchyseal and I took a diametric stance on the matter which resulted in a heated discussion with a few disrespectful remarks by me. It was a series of unfortunate events, driven by our different weltanschauung and my little ego. Twitchyseal is the bigger man in my case, and I owe them an apology.
But your case is very much different. My matter is trivial compared to yours.

I am not going to get involved in another scam accusation.
I will leave you with some advice:  Be respectful. Don't be presumptuous with your opinions about other members. Don't deviate from the subject. Stick to the facts and always be honest. You will garner more support this way if your case is true. Good luck.

I thought you were gone from the forum..... In some way I am always "civil" but I don't have to "respect" liars and thieves in some other way, and I can call them for what they are. Nobody has to post nonsense messages, lie about participating in a giveaway I organize and say "I did not ask for his money" while they did. These are the same people opposing my flag.

The case here is only a case of some dishonest people in some instances, and some other instances some stupid people just following the Crowd, some sort of "group thinking".
The dishonest people are about not to increase the cost of their scammers advertising on this forum. If they were to say to Fortunejack.com you'll have to pay, more or less scammy websites advertised here will recalculate the real cost of being on this forum since they'll also have to pay their scammed victims. On the other hand, look at the LTCCasino scam accusation. They got flagged even before their 3 months investigation was over as per their terms and conditions, and they were just saying they were investigating. Why? Because they don't do signature campaigns here. This is the nasty business of some ungodly people who believe in nothing else than dirty money.

[edgycorner]

~

You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

If you believe they are in the wrong, then question them instead of bombarding adjectives. This is only hurting your case. Take a smoko.
Please be respectful.

You should be asking these questions instead of picking fights with other members

Question FJ intention behind that clause, and how they determine which bets to cancel under that clause.
 

A sportsbook can easily refuse to accept a bet when it's placed for the same event again. Why did they accept the bet?

If they fail to provide any other criteria for canceling bets of the same event then create a campaign to find FJ users who placed similar bets and lost. Since they deserve a refund under that clause.

Good luck. I won't participate in this discussion anymore.

[PaperWallet]

You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

If you believe they are in the wrong, then question them instead of bombarding adjectives. This is only hurting your case. Take a smoko.
Please be respectful.

You should be asking these questions instead of picking fights with other members

Question FJ intention behind that clause, and how they determine which bets to cancel under that clause.

Good luck. I won't participate in this discussion anymore.

Ok thank you for the advice, but all of those questions were asked. It didn't help my flag, even if some acknowledged that this is pure theft. Although I feel no regrets because -for the most part- they're already set in their mind of what they should do, and I've already explained it.

They don't want to increase the cost of +/- scammy websites of being on this forum by forcing them to stop selective scam some big winners, because the promoters will then be less likely inclined to do signature campaigns for them.

You should call evil by its name, and if it is my expression style that makes them support one of their promoters in scamming somebody, let it be, it means they're bad people.

I am not going to get involved in another scam accusation.

Of course you aren't, one of the mob members here gave you a taste of what it should be like for you-as far as your trust score is concerned-if you dare to say something else than what the scam promoters here want.

[edgycorner]

You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

If you believe they are in the wrong, then question them instead of bombarding adjectives. This is only hurting your case. Take a smoko.
Please be respectful.

You should be asking these questions instead of picking fights with other members

Question FJ intention behind that clause, and how they determine which bets to cancel under that clause.

Good luck. I won't participate in this discussion anymore.

Ok thank you for the advice, but all of those questions were asked. It didn't help my flag, even if some acknowledged that this is pure theft. Although I feel no regrets because -for the most part- they're already set in their mind of what they should do, and I've already explained it.

They don't want to increase the cost of +/- scammy websites of being on this forum by forcing them to stop selective scam some big winners, because the promoters will then be less likely inclined to do signature campaigns for them.

You should call evil by its name, and if it is my expression style that makes them support one of their promoters in scamming somebody, let it be, it means they're bad people.

I am not going to get involved in another scam accusation.

Of course you aren't, one of the mob members here gave you a taste of what it should be like for you-as far as your trust score is concerned-if you dare to say something else than what the scam promoters here want.

I really want to stop being a part of this and work on my paper.
I will make one final reply lol

I went through your case again, you did receive 100,000 EUR and their T&C indeed contains the "max win" clause.
I checked previous instances of their T&C, and was able to fetch this https://web.archive.org/web/20200512020750/https://fortunejack.com/faq/sportsbook
Clearly, this term was still there way before your bet. So they did not change any T&C either. It was there before your bet.

The only thing that sticks out is why did they accept your bet? You should have built your case on that. Now it's too late. You have made too many enemies and nobody wants to support you now. Turning it into a very feeble case. It's indeed a very deplorable clause, and they shouldn't have accepted your bet. But it's a question of ethics. This is why your scam accusation couldn't fly.

Your accusation did present the scurvy side of crypto casinos, but we all are aware of it to some extent (like ignoring your married friend's cold sore).

You should move on and enjoy your life it's too short to waste it

Of course you aren't, one of the mob members here gave you a taste of what it should be like for you-as far as your trust score is concerned-if you dare to say something else than what the scam promoters here want.

Read my reply about it. I couldn't be more accurate about what happened. It was all ego and discord.