Royse777 is Casino Critique

[PaperWallet]

What if someone, as an example, has 2 BTC addresses. It reminds me of the "pay 1 btc, get 2 btc back, maximum 5 btc per person". Are you going to confiscate his funds, like you justify confiscating funds of all players on the casinos advertised here lol

I can't speak for the team, but participation in the profit sharing (by buying chips) is anonymous, so there's really no way for Casino Critique to know if someone is buying chips using different addresses.  In addition, the rules state that using multiple addresses is prohibited but they didn't specify in writing what would happen if they found out someone was doing that (that I remember, anyway)

How about 2 addresses used in same transaction at some point. How about same person posting about their addresses mentioning the 2 participating addresses. It wouldn't be surprising for them to seize funds.
It is just funny and stupid to limit the amount per address, as this could be easily circumvented, with just a bit of intelligence, but of course we're not talking about intelligent people here either way.

These are individuals with no hope of achieving anything useful for other humans. They can only live hiding behind their screens and scamming others. So even if the project is not a scam in itself, it will be advertising scams as it is done on this forum

There's certainly a risk in buying chips, and that risk is that there won't ever be any revenue to share.  That should be clear if you read the terms and conditions page and the details of the revenue pool setup, so there's nothing being withheld as far as I know.

It's all about how the potential investor interprets things. Their terms and conditions won't make them successful. The risk is that of being scammed, not whether if it is going to be successful or not. The informed investor will never put a dime in such a thing. It would be smarter to play a rogue slot machine than putting a dime in this thing, at least a rogue slot pays some of the money back.

So we'll see.  I'm not sure what happens if a small amount of money is raised through the chip sale, i.e., if they're going to go ahead with the plan or return the money or what.  For the life of me, I can't remember if that was covered in the terms & conditions page.

returning the money lol yes of course, with the reputation they have as you say, they're very much trustworthy in doing that.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Come on examplens! Are you kidding me? Didn't you see it?

Just by looking at the names of some members listed that I have no time for, I would be inclined to advise all to look at the project with caution.

(who is part of a very small group I trust)

This small group consists of his campaign manager, the people who have him in their trust list (including you), a few others who speak his voice and of course those balls-less trolls who pop up to create conflicts between forum users like OP. Don't you know it? He does not do anything good to contribute to the community but to harass forum users.

Read his post again. Give me a positive sign he was able to notice. He noticed only the people he disliked. And interestingly he has to advise what Hhampuz should do and not. Hey Hhampuz, does it mean everything you do needs approval from JollyGood?

DireWolfM14 is also part of escrow there, I would suggest you read his post in this thread, you probably missed it. He is very clearly explained his position in the whole story (I believe that Hhampuz also has a similar statement)

In other words we are doubting DireWolfM14, Hhampuz including others involved in the project has no sense to make a good judgement when they know who is Casino Critique. Very disappointing realization for these well known users.

[...]
How about 2 addresses used in same transaction at some point. How about same person posting about their addresses mentioning the 2 participating addresses. It wouldn't be surprising for them to seize funds.
[...]

returning the money lol yes of course, with the reputation they have as you say, they're very much trustworthy in doing that.

https://ibco.casinocritique.com/terms-and-conditions/
Ctrl+F and type "return". Two results will highlight.

Once the hard cap is met, any remaining Chips will be returned to the input address, minus network fees.

If you send us more than 1000 Chips, we will only keep 1000 Chips, and the remainder will be returned to one of the input addresses, i.e, any amount greater than the 0.001 btc increment.

About more than one address

In the case of more than one input address for a transaction ID, we will consider the first input address to be your receiving address for Casino Critique revenue.

I don't understand where is your problem. Do you not read before making an accusation?

[LoyceV]

I would be inclined to advise all to look at the project with caution.

I am not a potential Investor. But do you still suggest everyone consider the project cautiously after reading Direwolf's statement?

I'd say it's wise to always use caution before investing in anything, especially crypto projects!

For the record, this is incorrect:

Casino Critique trying to raise 10 BTC

There are only 7,000 "chips" for sale, at 0.001BTC each. I'll do the math for you: they're looking to raise 7 BTC.

[FatFork]

For the record, this is incorrect:

Casino Critique trying to raise 10 BTC

There are only 7,000 "chips" for sale, at 0.001BTC each. I'll do the math for you: they're looking to raise 7 BTC.

I haven't gone through the entire chip allocation structure, but maybe he was referring to this:

Total Chip in circulation is 9,999 Chips. The Casino Critique team holds 999 Chips, and 9000 Chips are for sale.

https://ibco.casinocritique.com/terms-and-conditions/

There is also a "chips sold" indicator on their website that goes up to 9,499.



It's still not 10 BTC, though. 

[LoyceV]

I haven't gone through the entire chip allocation structure, but maybe he was referring to this:

Total Chip in circulation is 9,999 Chips. The Casino Critique team holds 999 Chips, and 9000 Chips are for sale.

I think the first chip buyers get a discount, and some chips are given away. 7 BTC is still a lot of money though, but nothing compared to the ICOs that collected tens of millions for nothing more than an empty promise.
Eddie13 (click for full context) nicely wrote how the "scam fighting" on Bitcointalk focusses on small things while the big scams get away with it:

I’m glad y’all saved sooooo many imbeciles from getting “scammed” by shutting that entire thriving economy down..

Oh right, the morons probably just threw their (saved from scam) money at one of the great 2017 ICOs instead..
I’m sure their filthy rich now thanks to all that saving grace..

“Campaign/bounty managers”, oh those valiant pillars of our community, surely made their cuts off the countless ICO scams and casinos designed from the start to suck up every Satoshi they can..
What heroes..
So trustworthy..

These “managers” are held in such high regard, yet never deemed responsible for their outcomes, of the biggest scams and suctions of satoshis this forum has ever seen..

[Smartvirus]

Alt accounts might not be against the forum rules but, there are ways to it that can constitute an abuse. It's one thing to create an account and use it for slander or raising accusations or perhaps act as DT from that single account and its another thing to create an account for every response. Like you can see in OP's user and the response to Yahoo62278 on the first page.
Is that really for the best or a way to go about crating and using alts? We've got so many inactive accounts on the forum and adding to the list by crating accounts with existing user names just with a little addition doesn't look okay to me.

Am not very familiar with the project being referred to but I was aware of the Royse777/BitLucy case and the DT's handled it good due to the facts that were presented. Am sure should the accusation as in OP come by any fact, it would be looked into properly and questions would be asked and answered.

[AnotherAlt]

So the team leader and probable brains behind the project is Little Mouse?... Just by looking at the names of some members listed that I have no time for, I would be inclined to advise all to look at the project with caution.

I am not a potential Investor. But do you still suggest everyone consider the project cautiously after reading Direwolf's statement?

I'd say it's wise to always use caution before investing in anything, especially crypto projects!

Well, Kind of, yeah. I agree that investing in online platforms is not 100% safe. I am not a potential investor. But, I had laughed at Mr. JollyFuck's theory. He asked everyone to look at the project cautiously because he didn't like the team. I would say it's pretty much safe to go with Reputable Bitcointalk escrows than to invest in unknown ICOs. As I already said, I am not a potential investor. So, I am not going to invest. But, If I were to invest, I wouldn't hear Mr. JollyFuck's theory. 

[The Sceptical Chymist]

It's all about how the potential investor interprets things. Their terms and conditions won't make them successful. The risk is that of being scammed, not whether if it is going to be successful or not.

OK, so I should have clarified my statement:  if you assume that what's in the T&C section is true and that the members of CC aren't trying to pull off a scam here, then the risk is basically the same as investing in any business that hasn't gotten off the ground yet.  You believe it's a scam, and I've given my opinion on that and I'm not going to strenuously argue that point, since I can't read the minds of the people behind CC and I don't have any more knowledge of how they're going to operate than you do.

I disclosed my participation because I don't want my reputation tarnished in any way should something bad happen, and it's later discovered that I had something to do with the project.  I'm not, in fact, part of it; I just did the editing, since the website is in English and they needed someone proficient in that language.  I wasn't even in control of what went up on the site.  I just made suggestions, which may or may not have been accepted.

This is the first time I've ever been involved in a crypto project in any way, and even though I had reservations about jumping in (because I'd be putting my reputation at risk by being associated with a gambling website, which is way outside my area of expertise), I figured it was a small role and YOLO, right?  

All that aside, I wish CC the best and do hope they prove the naysayers wrong.  It doesn't look like they're raising a lot of money based on how many chips have been sold, so I'm curious as to how they're going to proceed should they not raise anything close to 7, 8, or 10BTC.

To eddie13's point: at least there are bounty/campaign managers making sure participants get paid.  You might think they're contributing to scams or whatever else, but for the most part they handle large amounts of money and can be trusted not to abscond with it.  If you or anyone else acknowledges that campaigns and bounties are an important part of the crypto economy (and important to the forum itself), then you'd be hard-pressed to argue that we'd be better off without them.

[notwhatyouthink]

I'm going to make my last comment on the subject, and I'll probably stop using this alt as well.

What is clear is that many of you here know who is behind this alt, and you hide it for a very simple reason: MONEY.

You are involved in one way or another with the project and you know that if you say who is behind it, potential investors will not like it.

The answers I have seen here have made me change my mind about many of you.

Alt accounts might not be against the forum rules but, there are ways to it that can constitute an abuse.

Creating an alt to raise 7BTC without saying which disreputable person is behind it doesn't seem like an abuse to you?

[LoyceV]

you hide it for a very simple reason: MONEY.

Try again: PRIVACY. Until I see a reason not to, I respect people's privacy.
You of all people should appreciate that, given that you're hiding behind an alt account. Feel free to PM me who's alt you are, and I'll respect your privacy too.

[Timelord2067]

...

Poor you.  You remind me of that other nutter Hippie Tech who's also earned just one merit more than you on zero ...

[The Sceptical Chymist]

And reputable naim027 is banned right? I guess better to use that name when seeking funds rather than his alt-account called Dic3L0v3r because that would be a real put-off for investors  

Lol.  Is that the account he used in his ban appeal thread?  I remember making comments there, but for the life of me I cannot recall the name of the account he used, though I recognize the Dic3L0v3r name.

I supported naim027 in that appeal, as I thought he was making decent contributions to the forum--and that was well before I heard about Casino Critique.  He didn't get a lot of supporters, and I understand why his name doesn't immediately instill trust in someone seeing it attached to the project.  But as far as the CC slogan goes, it would be kinda-sorta awkward to write "The brainchild of a group of reputable Bitcointalk members, except for one or two whose trustworthiness is disputed.".

Do you not feel maybe by having your name attached to this project (even as an unpaid contributor) you are risking your reputation? I mean if they have a well respected forum member such as yourself saying you are helping out on their website it could in the eyes of investors and newbies be taken as you giving the project a seal of approval-to-invest and I am sure that is not your intention.

I've stated that I believe that the team behind Casino Critique isn't looking to scam anyone, and I'll hold that belief until I see evidence that suggests otherwise.  I am not, repeat not, giving it my personal seal of approval, as I haven't been a part of the creation of the project aside from making sure the copy on the CC website is legible.  

The team members (I'm assuming) are communicating and planning on Telegram or wherever, and I haven't been privy to any of those communications, so unless I knew what was going on behind the scenes I'd never state with confidence that anyone should invest with them.  On the other hand, I find it unlikely that all of those members are colluding to scam the chip buyers.  There are some I do trust, like Hhampuz for example, and collectively they'd be ruining a bunch of reputations that took a long time to earn if they were doing something untoward, and strictly from a practical viewpoint it doesn't seem like it'd be worth it--unless they did raise 7 or 9BTC or what have you.  Those charity abusers from a while back proved that big sums of bitcoin can be tempting and cause reps to be ruined.

Whatever happened to those guys, anyway?

In any case, I've disclosed my involvement and the extent of my endorsement (which is to weigh the risks vs. the potential profits and is essentially neutral) of CC.  Hopefully if anything bad did go down, people wouldn't think that I profited or that I caused anyone to get scammed.  And seriously, if any members here do think I'm promoting CC or doing something wrong, let it be known and we'll discuss it.  I'm an anonymous username on a discussion forum, so my reputation is all I've got.

Creating an alt to raise 7BTC without saying which disreputable person is behind it doesn't seem like an abuse to you?

There isn't one person behind the Casino Critique project; it's a team, and those team members (aside from the one member writing from the CC official account) are listed on their website.  If you think it's Royse777 behind the Casino Critique forum account and don't trust him, act accordingly.  But also realize that he wouldn't have complete control over any funds the team has, so IMO it's really a moot point.

Until I see a reason not to, <snip>

Oh, wow!  I remember that debacle (though fuzzily) and also that aTriz was fairly trusted prior to his public disgrace and shaming.  However, everything he did he did on his own and not with a team of forum members assembled.  I'll have to go back and re-read that thread to refresh my memory.

[dkbit98]

There is also a "chips sold" indicator on their website that goes up to 9,499.

I think that few hundred chips should be given for free to various forum members.
This chips are not ''altcoin'' because they are not on any blockchain I think, and I could hardly call this a bribe.

Try again: PRIVACY. Until I see a reason not to, I respect people's privacy.
You of all people should appreciate that, given that you're hiding behind an alt account. Feel free to PM me who's alt you are, and I'll respect your privacy too.

Why don't you simply ''admit'' that you received 1 million dollars in Bitcoin to keep the secret of original Casino Critique owner, and everyone else did the same  
Owner must be a very rich man when he could bribe many DT members with so much money...
Real question is who is the real notwhatyouthink, but then you search who had the biggest argument with Royse and you will probably find him easily, he is still obsessed with him.



notwhatyouthink is dead.
long live the notwhatyouthink.

[JollyGood]

On a serious note, I think it is clear having someone as reputable and trustworthy as Hhampuz (who is part of a very small group I trust) as an escrow-only gives the group the opportunity to use his name and reputation as a way to entice investors either by design or by default.

Do you not feel maybe by having your name attached to this project (even as an unpaid contributor) you are risking your reputation? I mean if they have a well respected forum member such as yourself saying you are helping out on their website it could in the eyes of investors and newbies be taken as you giving the project a seal of approval-to-invest and I am sure that is not your intention.

DireWolfM14 is also part of escrow there, I would suggest you read his post in this thread, you probably missed it. He is very clearly explained his position in the whole story (I believe that Hhampuz also has a similar statement)
Check here > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5414027.msg60969839#msg60969839

I did not read it because I have him and several of his buddies on ignore and do not have much time for any of them, maybe occasionally temporarily unignoring them here and there to see what they are spouting if it happens to be in a thread that I take an interest.

I would be inclined to advise all to look at the project with caution.

I am not a potential Investor. But do you still suggest everyone consider the project cautiously after reading Direwolf's statement?

I'd say it's wise to always use caution before investing in anything, especially crypto projects!

Of course, that is the best advice and one I would offer to all and have done many times in the past.

For the record, this is incorrect:

Casino Critique trying to raise 10 BTC

There are only 7,000 "chips" for sale, at 0.001BTC each. I'll do the math for you: they're looking to raise 7 BTC.

For investors to part with 7 BTC on the say-so of that group would be a remarkable achievement. I doubt they will raise anything near it.

As for the chips for sale, it is not easy to understand the actual number after reading the text here in their Terms and Conditions

Is the number actually 4000?

And reputable naim027 is banned right? I guess better to use that name when seeking funds rather than his alt-account called Dic3L0v3r because that would be a real put-off for investors  

Lol.  Is that the account he used in his ban appeal thread?  I remember making comments there, but for the life of me I cannot recall the name of the account he used, though I recognize the Dic3L0v3r name.

Yes it is the account he exchanged merits with himself at one time too and he uses the same Dic3L0v3r alt-account when bumping the thread hoping to have the naim027 account banned  

I've stated that I believe that the team behind In any case, I've disclosed my involvement and the extent of my endorsement (which is to weigh the risks vs. the potential profits and is essentially neutral) of CC.  Hopefully if anything bad did go down, people wouldn't think that I profited or that I caused anyone to get scammed.  And seriously, if any members here do think I'm promoting CC or doing something wrong, let it be known and we'll discuss it.  I'm an anonymous username on a discussion forum, so my reputation is all I've got.

Thankfully they are not using your name on their promotional material. Anyway, you stated clearly what involvement you have and you also have an excellent reputation in the forum and it should stay intact regardless of what the future holds for Casino Critique.

You are an approachable person, I am sure if anybody has any concerns they can contact you in private and you will not hesitate to engage with them regarding whatever it is they might be finding problematic.

[DireWolfM14]

I did not read it because I have him and several of his buddies on ignore and do not have much time for any of them

Stop lying.  You have me on ignore because I've criticized your abuse of the trust system.  It's all documented in black and white, including your retaliatory exclusion of me in your trust list.  So now you've proven that not only are you thin-skinned, but also dishonest about it.  Not a good look for a DT member, if you ask me.

[dkbit98]

Stop lying.  You have me on ignore because I've criticized your abuse of the trust system.  It's all documented in black and white, including your retaliatory exclusion of me in your trust list.  So now you've proven that not only are you thin-skinned, but also dishonest about it.  Not a good look for a DT member, if you ask me.

Surprise surprise... trollybad did the same thing with me just because I criticized him, as if I care... but this just proves he is abusing his Default Troll membership.
I wouldn't be surprised if he was the one who created or initiated bunch of this newbie alt accounts and accusation topics about Casino Critique.
This is his loooong list, it can't even fit one post:
https://loyce.club/trust/2022-09-17_Sat_05.07h/1016855.html

[JollyGood]

If what you say is true, why is Royse777 not mentioned in their Review and Content Team?

Royse777 has been caught, no matter how hard his buddies try to hide him.

After Bitlucy777 fiasco, he is now back with Casino Critique trying to raise 10 BTC, in collusion with his DT friends.

Let's hope no one is foolish enough to throw their money away.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

You are an approachable person, I am sure if anybody has any concerns they can contact you in private and you will not hesitate to engage with them regarding whatever it is they might be finding problematic.

Absolutely, though if it concerns problems with Casino Critique itself I don't think I could be of much help.  But I'm going to remain optimistic that there's not going to be any need for that.  I'm also hoping the project turns out to reach some level of success--but I get the feeling that whether that happens or not depends on the team raising enough money to get started, and like I said, judging from the number of chips sold so far there hasn't been much interest.  

I do know that much of what's on the roadmap is vague, and CC's revenue goals are lofty to say the least.  I think if they laid out a concrete plan with details as to how they're going to attract partners, sponsors, advertisers, and whatever else it might make it way more enticing to potential investors.  I think I suggested something like that when I was doing my editing.  The thing is, people have become jaded by all the scam ICO projects that promised everything and delivered nothing that they're reluctant to buy into some profit-sharing program that doesn't have a detailed prospectus, trusted bitcointalk members or not.

Unfortunately, I've got no control or even a say in any of that.  I don't even have experience in gambling or business, just writing, so my role was small and is most likely finished--unless they do launch the review site, need an editor, and decide to reach out to me for assistance with proofreading and such.

Owner must be a very rich man when he could bribe many DT members with so much money...

I gotta tell you, my impression is that there's no money to get started, much less bribe anyone to keep secrets.

[vycl87]

You may be right and you may be wrong, either way you need to present proof instead of throwing something at the wall and hoping it sticks. You also probably need to be a man and use your real account instead of hiding like a chickenshit. Don't be a pussy and claim you're scared you'll be targeted.

Why would they need this?

After all, they can write whatever they want and declare whatever they want as the Godzilla of the forum!!!
The "so-called" aristocrats of the forum in this way openly create rent for themselves; They can also participate in campaigns from their own sub-accounts as they wish. Who would want to lose this rent?

Especially when we think that the forum is far from its former popularity, they can now do these tactics more easily. I don't know about Royse, but when I read what's written, I get the idea that it's a very clear smear campaign.

[Myleschetty]

I am not a potential Investor. But do you still suggest everyone consider the project cautiously after reading Direwolf's statement?

The secure tip for cryptocurrency investment is to always do your own research because most people who are victims of scams or dump-and-pump projects rely on influencer statements about projects.
Yes, there are more than 2-3 reputable members of the forum who are involved in the Casino Critique but people still need to be cautious.