Royse777, Bitlucy and long story in brief

[JollyGood]

One ended up being too hostile and decided not to co-operate me. I was asked to KYC him (my hands are still tied and considering the situation it will be for good) because he was threatening to kill the CEO and confirmed hiring professional killer from darkweb. He denied even after I had evidence of the conversation he was posting in his private social channels to his audience.

why do you still insist on KYC in order to repay deposits? what is it for?
as far as I've seen Bitlucy is dead, and the website is offline. so there is no one behind it, to whom KYC is actually shown?
I understood that KYC verification was requested for the return of the deposit, correct me if I'm wrong.

You have raised a valid concern but as usual Royse777 has not answered questions she finds difficult to explain. Bitlucy does not exist. Under which rules and under which jurisdiction is Royse777 asking for KYC?

It seems KYC or not, Royse777 stated she will not send the victim money that was scammed by Bitlucy even after Royse777 promised to return to all victims.

[1714968470]

1714968470

[1714968470]

1714968470

[1714968470]

1714968470

[Timelord2067]

Quite a while ago I had distrusted Royse777 then later I removed that distrust as I couldn't recall why I'd placed them on my distrust list. At that same time a few others also removed their distrust of Royse777.

Reading through this thread my thoughts were indifferent, then I read this:

It does not bother me anymore. You should be happy that I did not use my DT status against you that I did not paint your wall red.

~Royse777

Any negatives by Royse777 against myself from this point on I will consider to be retaliatory.

[AB de Royse777]

~Royse777

You are welcome, anyone is.

But, I really hope you did not misunderstood my words.

Reading through this thread my thoughts were indifferent, then I read this:

It does not bother me anymore. You should be happy that I did not use my DT status against you that I did not paint your wall red.

In other words, Yahoo should be happy because I never sent any retaliatory tag or even supported it against anyone. I had very good chance to paint yahoo's trust page if I was supporting retaliatory feedback.

Any negatives by Royse777 against myself from this point on I will consider to be retaliatory.

Why would I leave negative to you? Because you made above post. No!

You have raised a valid concern but as usual Royse777 has not answered questions she finds difficult to explain. Bitlucy does not exist. Under which rules and under which jurisdiction is Royse777 asking for KYC?

It seems KYC or not, Royse777 stated she will not send the victim money that was scammed by Bitlucy even after Royse777 promised to return to all victims.

He got his answer within 5 to 10 minutes of asking it.

[JollyGood]

I asked some questions almost a couple of days ago, there is another added now. Maybe you can reply:

- what percentage of the Bitlucy company given to Royse777?
- was there any paperwork signed between Royse777 and the Bitkucy CEO transferring that percentage over?
- what was the full name of the Bitlucy company with LLC, LTD etc?
- what is the current legal status of the company and the legal jurisdiction the company falls under?
- does anybody have a copy of the ToS/ToC and Privacy Policy of the Bitlucy website?

You have raised a valid concern but as usual Royse777 has not answered questions she finds difficult to explain. Bitlucy does not exist. Under which rules and under which jurisdiction is Royse777 asking for KYC?

It seems KYC or not, Royse777 stated she will not send the victim money that was scammed by Bitlucy even after Royse777 promised to return to all victims.

He got his answer within 5 to 10 minutes of asking it.

Link? I quoted examplens, where did you quote examplens and answer his question within 5-10 minutes of him asking?

[Poker Player]

I have to admit that I was wrong in my previous post, as Royse777 has managed to get a negative tag changed to neutral by keeping the thread open.

So she seems to be starting to regain her reputation. Now I only see 2 negative tags but I don't know if that depends on my trust list too and someone who doesn't have a custom trust list would see more or fewer negative tags.

[LoyceV]

- what percentage of the Bitlucy company given to Royse777?

I think it was 10%.

- was there any paperwork signed between Royse777 and the Bitkucy CEO transferring that percentage over?

Paperwork on the internet? Unlikely.

- what was the full name of the Bitlucy company with LLC, LTD etc?

As far as I know, this is unknown. That's not necessarily a bad thing, I've seen enough anonymous entities to know they can be good trade partners in crypto. But anonymous people should for instance never ask for KYC.

- what is the current legal status of the company and the legal jurisdiction the company falls under?

Unknown.

Now I only see 2 negative tags but I don't know if that depends on my trust list too and someone who doesn't have a custom trust list would see more or fewer negative tags.

Add ;dt to the URL: there are 2 negatives from DT.

[mv1986]

I have to admit that I was wrong in my previous post, as Royse777 has managed to get a negative tag changed to neutral by keeping the thread open.

So she seems to be starting to regain her reputation. Now I only see 2 negative tags but I don't know if that depends on my trust list too and someone who doesn't have a custom trust list would see more or fewer negative tags.

First I thought to leave a red tag (same as he did) then changed mind because leaving red will be completely a misuse of current trust rating. Edited

Don't forget to complete your quest by ~yahoo62278 in your trust list. I'd at least like you to look like you have a clue.

It does not bother me anymore. You should be happy that I did not use my DT status against you that I did not paint your wall red.

Do you really think a red tag from you would irritate or hurt me in the least? Tag me. My tag on you just needs reworded and it's still valid. Your tag is just you being a baby.

Obviously you do still care

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5406722.0

Bottom line, I got pissed at the way you act like a child towards me and decided to remove myself from the situation and readd the red tag that I gave you when the situation started. You created the situation, and IMO are obligated to answer any goddamn question that I might ask as long as it pertains to the situation. Instead of trying to answer questions with a cool head, you decided to be hotheaded and childish and not only not answer my inquiries, but also accuse me of stealing clients lmao. Your client contacted me for a 1 week campaign.

I was trying to be sympathetic in the beginning but you changed my feelings.

Do you deserve an apology? No, maybe a pacifier. Do I deserve 1, a case could be made both ways. You dragged me back into this disaster acting like Koil and creating a thread and locking it showing the community even more of your childish behavior.

I'll lower my tag to a neutral, but not because of anything you did. I got my answers in the next post from AnotherAlt whom I merited if anyone wants to check. I think you are easily aggravated and very hotheaded and have no business in DT. Go try and enjoy life instead of blaming everyone else for your mistakes.

I believe you overlooked yahoo's change from red to neutral?

Edit: ah, you didn't miss it, you were just wondering whether there was more you can't be aware of. Got you @PokerPlayer

[NotATether]

I believe you overlooked yahoo's change from red to neutral?

This is no longer a Royse777 name-clearing thread (the proof was shown about 2-3 pages ago), now it's a Royse vs. yahoo drama.

[Poker Player]

This is no longer a Royse777 name-clearing thread (the proof was shown about 2-3 pages ago), now it's a Royse vs. yahoo drama.

I think you forgot JollyGood.

[AnotherAlt]

I believe you overlooked yahoo's change from red to neutral?

This is no longer a Royse777 name-clearing thread (the proof was shown about 2-3 pages ago), now it's a Royse vs. yahoo drama.

And Don't forget JollyGood who is not satisfied yet with all the answers. He want some special treatment from Royse777

[mv1986]

I believe you overlooked yahoo's change from red to neutral?

This is no longer a Royse777 name-clearing thread (the proof was shown about 2-3 pages ago), now it's a Royse vs. yahoo drama.

And Don't forget JollyGood who is not satisfied yet with all the answers. He want some special treatment from Royse777

While Royse requests KYC from a customer for a company that doesn't exist anymore while insisting on keeping potentially relevant information private on her own.

Hm... Sounds kind of special to me as well.

[AB de Royse777]

- what percentage of the Bitlucy company given to Royse777?

I think it was 10%.

May I remind

For the record I spent over $3.2k out of my pocket, from GGR I was supposed to receive around $1.5k plus and for the current month, since we were having problems with the site we decided to give me $2k salary not the GGR. Today is the 22nd. He sent me 400$ and 200$ but after a few days he needed some payments done and took $240 from me. That $600 that I received from him all together. The above $3.2+$1.5+whatever it is from $2k for the month are still due. I was not stressing for my money but stressing for staff and customers withdrawals. This was important for me more than anything.

Please don't consider that it was given.

I believe you overlooked yahoo's change from red to neutral?

This is no longer a Royse777 name-clearing thread (the proof was shown about 2-3 pages ago), now it's a Royse vs. yahoo drama.

And Don't forget JollyGood who is not satisfied yet with all the answers. He want some special treatment from Royse777

While Royse requests KYC from a customer for a company that doesn't exist anymore while insisting on keeping potentially relevant information private on her own.

Hm... Sounds kind of special to me as well.

Please don't sound it like it happened today. When I was in contact with the user then bitlucy was up and running.

(my hands are still tied and considering the situation it will be for good)

Do you give attention to everything I say? I hope you are not feeding JollyGood only for entertainment.

[JollyGood]

- what percentage of the Bitlucy company given to Royse777?

I think it was 10%.

I believe I read another member quoted 10% but did Royse777 ever state the percentage voluntarily? I tried searching but that part remains elusive.

Let us say for example it is 10%, did Royse777 ever she state what Bitlucy as a company would receive in lieu of giving Royse777 that 10%? After all, if it was the CEO who held 100% of the company but he surrendered 10% of his holdings, what was Bitlucy going to gain from it?

- was there any paperwork signed between Royse777 and the Bitkucy CEO transferring that percentage over?

Paperwork on the internet? Unlikely.

If there was a registered company called Bitlucy or a parent holding company that owned Bitlucy, then in order to be given 10% of that company some form of paperwork had to be exchanged. If there was no paperwork exchanged between Bitlucy and Royse777 and no contract was signed, exactly how did Royse777 gain 10% of the company?

- what was the full name of the Bitlucy company with LLC, LTD etc?

As far as I know, this is unknown. That's not necessarily a bad thing, I've seen enough anonymous entities to know they can be good trade partners in crypto. But anonymous people should for instance never ask for KYC.

Agreed.

- what is the current legal status of the company and the legal jurisdiction the company falls under?

Unknown.

With no Terms of Service, no Terms and Conditions and no Privacy Policy it will impossible to know what the company stood for before it scammed and shut down. Without those details it will be impossible to know if any clauses were inserted that allowed victims and others who wanted to start litigation (and in which jurisdiction).

[AB de Royse777]

I believe I read another member quoted 10% but did Royse777 ever state the percentage voluntarily? I tried searching but that part remains elusive.

Unimaginable!
Mr. Bitcointalk forum Lawyer, do you even do your case study?

May I ask you now, you keep rumbling all these what to achieve? I question your motive.

If you think you are wannabe Lauda then you have a long way to go to meet her/his standard.

[JollyGood]

This is no longer a Royse777 name-clearing thread (the proof was shown about 2-3 pages ago), now it's a Royse vs. yahoo drama.

I think you forgot JollyGood.

I beg to differ, had he wanted to add my name he could have but I am not part of any drama 

I believe you overlooked yahoo's change from red to neutral?

This is no longer a Royse777 name-clearing thread (the proof was shown about 2-3 pages ago), now it's a Royse vs. yahoo drama.

And Don't forget JollyGood who is not satisfied yet with all the answers. He want some special treatment from Royse777

You are part correct and part incorrect.

No, I am not part of any drama just because I asked questions and refuse to accept most of what Royse777 is stating but can the same be said about you? Since you uploaded images of alleged chats which you claim as proof that the elusive Bitlucy CEO and Royse777 are different people, all that by using an alt-account instead of your regular forum account, you have made yourself part of the drama.

Yes you are absolutely correct I am not satisfied with the answers.

No, I do not want special treatment from Royse777 on the contrary I just want the part owner of a scam casino who held the official title of "Co-Partner and Marketing Director" to stop being economical with the truth and if possible for her to stop using her bouts of aggression and tantrums as misdirection tactics because questions related to a scam should be answered.

[FatFork]

- what is the current legal status of the company and the legal jurisdiction the company falls under?

Unknown.

With no Terms of Service, no Terms and Conditions and no Privacy Policy it will impossible to know what the company stood for before it scammed and shut down. Without those details it will be impossible to know if any clauses were inserted that allowed victims and others who wanted to start litigation (and in which jurisdiction).

The company and legal status of BitLucy Casino have never been publicly disclosed, as far as I know. According to their T&C, the legal jurisdiction is Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, although I'm not sure that is true since all other information is unknown. No address or other contact information.

Here is a snapshot of the BitLucy T&C as of June 23, 2022:
https://archive.ph/iRVLo

I believe there were several iterations of the documents since they changed the software and started from scratch several times, but this is the only copy I'm aware of (and probably the most recent one since they shut down the site for good not long after).

[examplens]

He got his answer within 5 to 10 minutes of asking it.

Link? I quoted examplens, where did you quote examplens and answer his question within 5-10 minutes of him asking?

it's true, I got some kind of answer. I would say that there is a realistic explanation for not publishing certain data. Apparently, everything has gone so far that he justifiably worries about the safety of himself and his family.

however, I think that the whole communication, in this case, and everything that happens afterwards, could have been set up better. To avoid wrong interpretations and subsequent explanations of the same.

[AnotherAlt]

No, I am not part of any drama just because I asked questions and refuse to accept most of what Royse777 is stating but can the same be said about you? Since you uploaded images of alleged chats which you claim as proof that the elusive Bitlucy CEO and Royse777 are different people,

I just shared here what I had to share. I didn't say that Bitlucy CEO and Royse777 are different people. I said it doesn't look to me like they are the same person. You can read the conversation and Judge. I don't have to make a judgment.

all that by using an alt-account instead of your regular forum account, you have made yourself part of the drama.

Because I am afraid of some wolf crowd, they can do anything without proper evidence. The funny thing is, My main account is on newbie rank. However, theymos optimistic about it, and I would like to follow him

I don't have a problem with alt accounts as long as they're not used for evading bans. If you're hesitant to say something controversial because you don't want it to be associated with your name, please create an alt account and say it.

Yes, you are absolutely correct I am not satisfied with the answers.

Because Royse didn't send you the chat conversations and transaction history in your PM?

[LoyceV]

If there was no paperwork exchanged between Bitlucy and Royse777 and no contract was signed, exactly how did Royse777 gain 10% of the company?

My assumption was that sharing ownership was based on a gentlemen's agreement.

[NeuroticFish]

After all, if it was the CEO who held 100% of the company but he surrendered 10% of his holdings, what was Bitlucy going to gain from it?

Don't we know the answer to this already? Bitlucy has gained a reputable face in the community, something that made people trust it easily, a face that was to blame when everything has fallen apart.

however, I think that the whole communication, in this case, and everything that happens afterwards, could have been set up better. To avoid wrong interpretations and subsequent explanations of the same.

Indeed. Somehow the communication in this issue was.. sub-standard... (for example, I don't understand why the closure for the famous google form were not announced^{[or I just missed that??]}, it could have been helped).
But with so many people pushing Royse - maybe some for good reason, but certainly some others simply for their own benefit - rushed and heated answers are not that much of a surprise.


I try to stay somewhat away from this drama, but I still want to say something to JollyGood: you've done very good job many times in nailing scammers, but I have a feeling you're exaggerating in this matter. Of course, I may be wrong, still...please think on this.