[ SCAM ALERT ] Blackjack.Fun is a cheap Scammer

[Pmalek]

The first time in so many years here on BCT finally a real, very serious, fair and acceptable answer, even if not all correct IMO.

I wouldn't agree with that. This sub-board is frequented with several individuals who are serious about what they are writing and take their time analyzing these cases. I can mention two from the top of my head who have also written in this thread of yours.

I will answer you later in more detail as soon I am free.

OK. Looking forward to reading what you have to say.

[1715274886]

1715274886

[1715274886]

1715274886

[1715274886]

1715274886

[JackpotRacer]

The first time in so many years here on BCT finally a real, very serious, fair and acceptable answer, even if not all correct IMO.

I wouldn't agree with that. This sub-board is frequented with several individuals who are serious about what they are writing and take their time analyzing these cases. I can mention two from the top of my head who have also written in this thread of yours.

I will answer you later in more detail as soon I am free.

OK. Looking forward to reading what you have to say.

Sorry for late answer

Sorry to disagree, but in this thread so far there has been no one besides you who has read the whole accusation in full and given a fair opinion. Until now, members have posted to show there signature, to attack me for whatever reasons and some who think that Blackjack.fun needs a lawyer on their side.

please let me tell you where I don't agree with you. (I will quote you in red and will give my opinion to it in black)

Were you scammed? No. The casino owner offered you more than what you are owed and you refused it. You keep insisting that you can't be bought.
You keep asking that they donate the $30 (or so) to a trusted legendary member on this forum. I see no reason why they would do that. PM the owner your address, get your $30 or $100 back, and then do with that money whatever you want. No one from their side has to create a BTC price guessing contest or pay anyone else just because you asked for it.

I did not ask to donate to a Legendary member. I asked to choose a Legendary member and gave 3 examples of members and the chosen one who will accept it should open a free giveaway in games and rounds.
as you are talking that I should get $30 or $100 back tells me that you did not understand the problem or you did miss this part. it also looks like that you missed the following part in another thread where I offered again a fair solution (IMO). the link is here
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5479478.msg63436226#msg63436226

Do I believe that you wanted to exploit the forum for personal benefit? I don't think so. Especially not for something as silly as $1 tournaments. Still, you could have handled the communication in a much more professional manner, which you failed to to. Perhaps your intentions were honest and you wanted to test the exploit you found in as many situations as possible. But the fact is, we will never know. The casino and other players found out that you were exploiting the bug before you reported it.

Yes, I found the exploit, but I found it when someone else was using it, which is a big difference since I did not find it and used it to win money in a 1 USDT tourney (LOL). I could wait for a 100 USDT tourney and try to use the exploit to win. again, it looks like you missed it or did not understand what I wrote. I found the exploit when another player used it against me. I then waited for the same situation to come up for me against the same player who used it against me before (in a 1 USDT tourney) and I used it many times in the same moment in the game as I wanted him to understand that I now know the exploit he is using. As it was very obvious what I was doing, I later understood from the owner of Blackjack.fun that players were complaining about me using this exploit. You could ask why didn't the players complain when the exploit was used before? the answer is that the players did not understand the exploit and as it was only once used in the game a normal player will not pay attention to it. you can believe me or not but I was also a casino game tester for some companies. But I used the exploit when the situation came up so many times that even the most stupid player will see it. why would I do this if I want to make money with this exploit?
I asked the owner several times to check the game logs so he could see what I was doing and if I was winning even 1 cent using this exploit. Did he do that? NO - why not???
He could and IMO still can check the logs of all the tournaments I played in and prove to me and everyone that I used the exploit to win the approximately $30.
Again, I tell him to do it and show to all members that I won the $30 using this exploit I found. If he can prove it, I will apologize wherever he wants, close the scam accusation thread and even send him $60 USDT penalty = double what he owes me.

The fact that he did not do this and still let the scam accusation thread run and also locked his thread shows me that he is not a professional casino owner. I know many developers who think they can run a casino, but they couldn't and eventually shut down.

Bottom line = I call it a scam and will bump the scam thread as often as I can. I am well experienced with online casino games and casinos and I can say that he will shut down the Blackjack.fun casino.
BTW I was the first one who shouted Scam before Moneypot owners pulled the rug against their Bankroll Investors, which is why they hate me

Sorry that the answer was longer then I thought. But I again thank you for a fair discussion

Cheers

[Pmalek]

I did not ask to donate to a Legendary member. I asked to choose a Legendary member and gave 3 examples of members and the chosen one who will accept it should open a free giveaway in games and rounds.

They don't have to do any of that just like you don't have to post a video of you doing jumping jacks before replying to any of my posts if I demanded it from you. Their refusal to do that doesn't make them a scam.

The fact that he did not do this and still let the scam accusation thread run and also locked his thread shows me that he is not a professional casino owner. I know many developers who think they can run a casino, but they couldn't and eventually shut down.

He might be unprofessional and incompetent like you say, but this is a thread where you are accusing him of being a scammer. Incompetence and even stupidity isn't equal to a scam unless, like I said earlier, there is an intentional reason why those bugs are there.

[JollyGood]

Without commenting further on the scam allegation itself, I went to the blackjack.fun website to check if they removed the Curacao logo because it gives the impression that they are operating under their licence but the logo is still there. As there is no link added that takes customers to a verification page that shows a valid licence, what purpose does it serve by blackjack.fun showing the Curacao logo?

It is disappointing to see they have not removed a small logo from their website (and they should have done it by now) in order to demonstrate they are not trying to mislead their own customers.

[Pmalek]

Without commenting further on the scam allegation itself, I went to the blackjack.fun website to check if they removed the Curacao logo because it gives the impression that they are operating under their licence but the logo is still there. As there is no link added that takes customers to a verification page that shows a valid licence, what purpose does it serve by blackjack.fun showing the Curacao logo?

Trying to look important, I guess. Most players are familiar with the Curacao brand, probably not so much with Costa Rica licensed online casinos. I am sure it would take less than a minute to get rid of the logo but they don't want to in an attempt not to remove any "importance" from the website. It should be replaced with a working link proving they have a valid Costa Rica license, though.

[JollyGood]

It definitely gives confidence to a customer if they see the platform they are gambling on is registered and licenced somewhere. For me personally, the Curacao licence is worthless and pointless because it is being used by the majority of businesses for the very same reason I have cited but nevertheless at least casinos can be held to some sort of account if victims report them to the Curacao authorities.

It should not take long to remove the Curacao logo but they are not doing it. As long as blackjack.fun are not even removing the Curacao logo they should not be used. As for the Costa Rica licence, they should update their link immediately because the conflicting details make them seem very unprofessional: https://blackjack.fun/provably-fair/toc

Trying to look important, I guess. Most players are familiar with the Curacao brand, probably not so much with Costa Rica licensed online casinos. I am sure it would take less than a minute to get rid of the logo but they don't want to in an attempt not to remove any "importance" from the website. It should be replaced with a working link proving they have a valid Costa Rica license, though.

[Pmalek]

It definitely gives confidence to a customer if they see the platform they are gambling on is registered and licenced somewhere. For me personally, the Curacao licence is worthless and pointless because it is being used by the majority of businesses for the very same reason I have cited but nevertheless at least casinos can be held to some sort of account if victims report them to the Curacao authorities.

I wouldn't call it worthless. It's better than nothing, but it's obviously nowhere close to the quality and requirements of the Malta Gaming Authority, Kahnawake Gaming Commission, or the UK Gambling Commission. The common person doesn't really know the difference. To them, it's just the name of a brand and logo they see on casino websites. And like I mentioned previously, the Curacao brand is a widespread one, making it a familiar sight.

[JollyGood]

I understand your stance, it is better to have some form of licence than to have nothing at all and I think Curacao has to be the most commonly used licence when it comes to crypto gambling/gaming. Having said that, the Curacao regulators do not have an exemplary record when it comes to handling complaints and allegations of bias have been around for a long time.

The sooner blackjack.fun remove the Curacao logo from their website the better it is for them and their reputation because (to my knowledge) they are not registered there, their parent company is registered in Costa Rica.

It definitely gives confidence to a customer if they see the platform they are gambling on is registered and licenced somewhere. For me personally, the Curacao licence is worthless and pointless because it is being used by the majority of businesses for the very same reason I have cited but nevertheless at least casinos can be held to some sort of account if victims report them to the Curacao authorities.

I wouldn't call it worthless. It's better than nothing, but it's obviously nowhere close to the quality and requirements of the Malta Gaming Authority, Kahnawake Gaming Commission, or the UK Gambling Commission. The common person doesn't really know the difference. To them, it's just the name of a brand and logo they see on casino websites. And like I mentioned previously, the Curacao brand is a widespread one, making it a familiar sight.

[Pmalek]

<Snip>

I wonder if their reluctance to remove the Curacao logo is reason enough to give them a negative trust rating?! They are intentionally lying about their license without showing signs that they will correct it. What's more, they have locked their ANN thread on Bitcointalk, showing once again that they aren't interested in communicating with the community. Besides the Curacao logo, Blackjack.Fun also has a Provably Fair logo at the bottom of their website. It's a different matter, but worth checking if the site is provably fair or not. If it isn't, they are again guilty of providing false information and lying.   

[JollyGood]

As I stated earlier, without commenting on any specific allegation and keeping my reply in generic terms, it certainly does not look good for them. What gives them a lot of benefit of any doubt at the moment (in my view) is that their forum representative was last online in the forum on 25th January 2024 therefore they might not have seen the comments about the Curacao logo amongst others.

I cannot comment on the provably fair issue but hopefully they will post here soon to make a comment about the logo otherwise there is a real risk they could end up with either neutral or negative feedbacks from members that are not satisfied with their response.

I wonder if their reluctance to remove the Curacao logo is reason enough to give them a negative trust rating?! They are intentionally lying about their license without showing signs that they will correct it. What's more, they have locked their ANN thread on Bitcointalk, showing once again that they aren't interested in communicating with the community. Besides the Curacao logo, Blackjack.Fun also has a Provably Fair logo at the bottom of their website. It's a different matter, but worth checking if the site is provably fair or not. If it isn't, they are again guilty of providing false information and lying.   

[Pmalek]

The OP of this scam accusation has failed to prove that a scam happened, and so I see no reason to support their claims for the time being. But I do believe that they are misleading their players by showing a wrong license logo. If they don't change it, I will PM the casino admin and ask them to comment about their license information and why they are still displaying the wrong one. If they don't want to take any action and make changes to their site, I will tag them afterwards.

[JackpotRacer]

The OP of this scam accusation has failed to prove that a scam happened, and so I see no reason to support their claims for the time being. But I do believe that they are misleading their players by showing a wrong license logo. If they don't change it, I will PM the casino admin and ask them to comment about their license information and why they are still displaying the wrong one. If they don't want to take any action and make changes to their site, I will tag them afterwards.

if you like it or not

Blackjack.fun owner scammed me! and others!

I will say it again and again until he pays what he owes me (and it is only peanuts)! But since he cannot buy me, he has to give it as a donation!

He could easily prove me wrong as he only needs to show the game logs, but he will not do it and I will take any bet that he cannot prove that I exploited the game to win. I know who exploited it, and maybe he does not want to show us who exploited the games and won.

[Pmalek]

Blackjack.fun owner scammed me!

You are living in imaginationland where you pull the strings deciding who does what for you and how. In the real world, things work a bit differently. In the real world, you were offered the money that you are owed, but you turned it down. You still do it even today. In your imagination, someone giving you what you are owed is a scammer because they are not dancing to the music you like to play.

I will say it again and again until he pays what he owes me (and it is only peanuts)! But since he cannot buy me, he has to give it as a donation!

No, he doesn't have to do anything! You do with your money as you please. All he has to do is to return it to you, which remains an impossible task because of your reluctance to accept it.

[JollyGood]

I would be inclined to agree. It seems there is a clear distinction between what the OP has based his scam accusation on and the fact Blackjack.fun are displaying a logo of a licencing authority (Curacao) when they are not even licenced by them. If they respond to your PM regarding why they are displaying a logo from Curacao on their website, do post the reason here.

The OP of this scam accusation has failed to prove that a scam happened, and so I see no reason to support their claims for the time being. But I do believe that they are misleading their players by showing a wrong license logo. If they don't change it, I will PM the casino admin and ask them to comment about their license information and why they are still displaying the wrong one. If they don't want to take any action and make changes to their site, I will tag them afterwards.

[JackpotRacer]

Blackjack.fun owner scammed me!

You are living in imaginationland where you pull the strings deciding who does what for you and how. In the real world, things work a bit differently. In the real world, you were offered the money that you are owed, but you turned it down. You still do it even today. In your imagination, someone giving you what you are owed is a scammer because they are not dancing to the music you like to play.

I will say it again and again until he pays what he owes me (and it is only peanuts)! But since he cannot buy me, he has to give it as a donation!

No, he doesn't have to do anything! You do with your money as you please. All he has to do is to return it to you, which remains an impossible task because of your reluctance to accept it.

You are the one living in a fantasy land and so is the owner and developer of Blackjack.fun, he cheated me and not only me and you are playing his lawyer. I don't know why, but there are too many brown noses here, so another one doesn't count much, but not with me.

He still owes me and he even tried to buy me with a dubious offer of 100USDT.

I was wrong with you as I thought you are a fair member.

he is playing all with his license logo. I can tell that he will close soon and pull the rug as moneypot did.

how much is this what they (Blckjack.fun) giveaway?
0.02TRX was added to your balance

how can he pay $30 

Maybe you are just a signature presenter and I was wrong.

[nutildah]

He still owes me and he even tried to buy me with a dubious offer of 100USDT.

So he tried to pay you the money he owes you, and you refused. 

If you only wanted $30, just ask for $30. Problem solved.

Seems like you are doing all you can to damage the reputation of this casino for no apparent reason. You can't name what the scam is, you can't point to a scammed party. Nobody should ever bother taking you seriously.

[JackpotRacer]

He still owes me and he even tried to buy me with a dubious offer of 100USDT.

So he tried to pay you the money he owes you, and you refused. 

If you only wanted $30, just ask for $30. Problem solved.

Seems like you are doing all you can to damage the reputation of this casino for no apparent reason. You can't name what the scam is, you can't point to a scammed party. Nobody should ever bother taking you seriously.

Why should one take you seriously as you even did not take the time to read all

and this all to show us your signature?

If you had read it all, you would know that I never asked to withdraw any money!

Very sad that the signature campaigns is killing all serious discussions, as the campaign manager is not checking those postings.

[nutildah]

The feedback I left you almost 4 years ago remains spot on:

nutildah

2020-03-02

While I do not trust users who allow themselves to be "scammed" so frequently, that in itself is not worthy of a negative trust. I do recommend avoiding engaging in any business with this user as they have an extremely poor attitude and tend to complain (a lot) if things don't go exactly as they hoped. Check previous feedback both given and received for examples.

A pity you haven't attempted to modify your attitude whatsoever.

Very sad that the signature campaigns is killing all serious discussions, as the campaign manager is not checking those postings.

Oh don't worry, I guarantee you they are being checked

[Pmalek]

So he tried to pay you the money he owes you, and you refused. 

If you only wanted $30, just ask for $30. Problem solved.

According to his logic, he can't be bought. Using that same logic, the owner is a scammer who owns him money and isn't paying up. When you point that out to him, he tells you he never wanted the money and that it's not about the money. 

Seems like you are doing all you can to damage the reputation of this casino for no apparent reason.

I agree with you on this. It has become personal for OP. There are multiple posts in this failed scam accusation thread pointing out the petty rewards that the casino owner is issuing to the winners/participants in this tournaments, and OP was making fun of him. OP does not want this to end and looks happy to keep throwing dirt at the casino owner hoping something will stick.

At this point, I am no longer sure OP has good intentions and wants to help fix the bugs on Blackjack.Fun. His attitude and the way he behaves shows otherwise. No one is this bitter that someone is refusing their help. But I can perhaps see him being bitter for not having a venue to exploit that bug he found.     

[holydarkness]

[...]
Blackjack.fun owner scammed me! and others!

I will say it again and again until he pays what he owes me (and it is only peanuts)! But since he cannot buy me, he has to give it as a donation!
[...]

[...]
If you had read it all, you would know that I never asked to withdraw any money![/b]
[...]

Coming from someone who take the time to read all [as many others here also did]... which one is it? You never ask to withdraw any money or they are a scammer until they pay what they owe you? Make up your mind.