Casino employees/promoters giving red trust to victims

[JCLadisav]

I created a thread about SB where the supporters/employees/promoters give red trust to victims because the casino says they cheated.

I have seen more such cases recently nd would like to call them out in this thread.

---

1- Shffle has locked my account and is not allowing me to withdraw the 0.12 ETH

Victim: theresa888
Red trust: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=3589279

Little Mouse gave the -ve feedback because the Shuffle team explained their side of story which may or may not be true but provided no proofs and hence I don't think the red trust was warranted.

Little Mouse is the marketing manager for Shuffle who also runs their campaign and hence should be considered an employee.



---


2- sportsbet.io scam 1731 usdt

Victim: pxdi
Red trust: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=3534812

The same thing again and jeremypwr runs several giveaways for Sportsbet.io


More loading ..

[Shishir99]

I created a thread about SB where the supporters/employees/promoters give red trust to victims because the casino says they cheated.

They did not leave negative feedback because someone said the casino scammed them. They were given negative feedback because it was convincing for those DT members to believe the platform that those users violated the rules and accused the casino of scamming. I always see gamblers come to this forum and create a scam accusation thread and their threads always read like they are the real victim. The main fact is, that they never write the whole story. They always share what is the bad of the casino and act like they are the victim. Later, those members were accused of using multiple accounts or violating other casino rules.

[SamReomo]

I don't know what's your problem with the casinos that are operating very well and the users are satisfied from their services. In your old topic you blamed SB for not a valid reason and now you're trying to say something similar about other casinos in this case Shuffle.

The casinos that are present on this forum are known to be reliable and they do care about their players. Whenever a legit player faces an issue then their issue get resolved by the representative of the casino or casinos that are present on this forum.

If someone who isn't a genuine victim comes on this forum and makes a fake story only to scam a casino then do you expect that the casinos will pay such users from their own pockets? That's not going to happen because the casinos know that which user is legit and has been facing an issue or which one is here only to show his/her frustration against the casinos.

[dkbit98]

I am sick of this clowns and I would ignore anything written by member JCLadisav because this is obvious just a puppet alt account of someone who is buthurt about specific casino.
If you want to see who the original owner is look who wrote most post recently about casino ^{(probably Sportsbet)} and who is obsessed with them.
My ignore list is getting bigger.

[Little Mouse]

1- Shffle has locked my account and is not allowing me to withdraw the 0.12 ETH

Victim: theresa888
Red trust: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=3589279

Little Mouse gave the -ve feedback because the Shuffle team explained their side of story which may or may not be true but provided no proofs and hence I don't think the red trust was warranted.

Little Mouse is the marketing manager for Shuffle who also runs their campaign and hence should be considered an employee.

I'm always neutral on such issue unless something is proven. In this case, I'm convinced that the user is dishonest, abusing the casino with multiple accounts. Otherwise, I wouldn't tag them.
Stop creating unnecessary drama.

[yahoo62278]

I wish users had more balls when it comes to accusations. Post from your main and show no fear man.

Far as accusations go, I will tag a person or casino while waiting for a response to an accusation or conclusion. Usually I try to stay out of it, but if a person is creating false accusations against a casino I feel like red trust could be warranted. I don't mean an accusation or case that ends up being solved, I mean a person accuses a casino of an activity and it's found out that person is trying to cheat casinos.

[BabyBandit]

I agree with yahoo62278 and dkbit98 use your "main account" and go for it and earn some respect. this just looks silly. Stay hard and stand up for your own opinions!

And about the case: I care to little to read about it, but saw those accounts got red tagged, maybe they deserved it maybe not. But who cares?

2- sportsbet.io scam 1731 usdt

1- Shuffle has locked my account and is not allowing me to withdraw the 0.12 ETH

One thing I can assure you that it's not Little Mouse's fault or any other users on this forum that this things have happen. You complaining in wrong directions.
They had problem (the complaining users) and they share it here and some users don't agree with it. It's called opinions, What's wrong with it?
The problem is with Shuffle & sportsbet.io and or not any campaign manager or a user that have a opinion here.

[EarnOnVictor]

Personally, I don't like this and am also disheartened by them. They look one-sided and it shows the lack of regulation of the red trust. I've always known that any power/freedom given without regulation can be misused, and what I just read are examples of that. I can only see excesses.

I wasn't privileged to know what transpired in the second one and I didn't read it still yet, but for the first one, I was able to read what happened and even replied there a while ago. My take is that for a company representative to come out to state their own side of the story without proof doesn't make the person alleging them guilty.

Or is that the way justice works? I'm just confused about this.

Maybe I am missing something, but in the absence of any proof on either side, is it not best to stay neutral?

[JeromeTash]

Personally, I don't like this and am also disheartened by them. They look one-sided and it shows the lack of regulation of the red trust. I've always known that any power/freedom given without regulation can be misused, and what I just read are examples of that. I can only see excesses.

I wasn't privileged to know what transpired in the second one and I didn't read it still yet, but for the first one, I was able to read what happened and even replied there a while ago. My take is that for a company representative to come out to state their own side of the story without proof doesn't make the person alleging them guilty.

The accuser even admitted to using a VPN service to access the site with already is a breach of ToS. Why was he even using a VPN service in the first place, very well knowing it could get his account blocked?

Secondly, when one uses a VPN service to access a casino, one must know that very many other bonus abusers also use VPNs to do the same. So the system can easily flag one's account as an alt of other abusing accounts if the IP address is the same. If you are a casino owner and possible alt accounts are flagged, what do you do? I would love to hear your opinion.

[nutildah]

Two fairly obvious cases of multi-accounting in the OP, and nothing more. Weak AF.

#1

Hey Theresa (or Preston, or any number of the other usernames you use) - I have no intention of doxxing you and your accounts here, so I'm limited in how much I'll share publicly, but so far we have identified an exorbitantly high number of accounts who:

- use the same device and IP
- bet the same markets with the same betting patterns
- KYC with information that is quite obviously not the real account owner's

As per our Terms of Service:

3.4. You are permitted to have only one Shuffle Account. If you attempt to open more than one Shuffle Account, any and all such accounts may be blocked, suspended or closed, and any sums credited to those accounts will be frozen and may be deducted.

As we have mentioned via support previously; if you continue to open accounts, we will continue to close them. We would not do this unless we had evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that these accounts are owned by the same person and are circumventing our Terms of Service. Please stop wasting support and the community's time, you've been warned multiple times.

#2

Until CEG gave their verdict, the common belief is that you're related to "punt10", "best10", "adi25", and "winwin10".

Of course, sportsbet --and by sportsbet, I mean Steve-- could verify this in matter of minutes or hours, when he had free time on his agenda, sometime arond this week, but unfortunatelly that's not possible anymore as this case is now under CEG's jurisdiction.

Note that pxdi never returned to let the forum know about the CEG decision.

So these are not "victims" but cheaters/rulebreakers that got caught. OP's decision to frame them as "victims" shows a clear, dishonest bias.

Honestly it looks to me like this coward is going out of his way to destroy the reputation of certain casinos / campaign managers and nothing more. I can think of two reasons for this: either they are butt-hurt about not getting accepted into certain campaigns or they work for a competing sportsbook (are perhaps even a competing campaign manager). I'm gonna go with the latter, given the fact that in their post history they support one particular casino and shit on all the rest.

And this isn't the only account from which they are doing this. Truly disgusting, petty behavior.

[EarnOnVictor]

Personally, I don't like this and am also disheartened by them. They look one-sided and it shows the lack of regulation of the red trust. I've always known that any power/freedom given without regulation can be misused, and what I just read are examples of that. I can only see excesses.

I wasn't privileged to know what transpired in the second one and I didn't read it still yet, but for the first one, I was able to read what happened and even replied there a while ago. My take is that for a company representative to come out to state their own side of the story without proof doesn't make the person alleging them guilty.

The accuser even admitted to using a VPN service to access the site with already is a breach of ToS. Why was he even using a VPN service in the first place, very well knowing it could get his account blocked?

Secondly, when one uses a VPN service to access a casino, one must know that very many other bonus abusers also use VPNs to do the same. So the system can easily flag one's account as an alt of other abusing accounts if the IP address is the same. If you are a casino owner and possible alt accounts are flagged, what do you do? I would love to hear your opinion.

Let me clear you better on this matter, I am not on any side, I am neutral. All I know is that justice is not served with the way some people are taking it here. This is a peripheral media trial, it doesn't hold any water, yet, I like to only take a side when either of them could prove it without any reasonable doubt. None has done that, they are just saying. So, I remain neutral.

Besides, VPN is not illegal in casinos, though, it is good to avoid it to avoid issues (that's if you know). You will contact many of them (casinos), and they will say they allow it. What if the guy never knew but used it? Don't you think he could be ignorant? I believe he was even ignorant to have stated it on that thread, and if it breaches their terms and conditions which I didn't read, then he is guilty. Nevertheless, cases are treated separately by a fair institution in case of ignorance. Many had used a VPN that breached Ts&Cs and was still fully settled when they traced that the gaming activities were entirely different. So, VPN usage is not the "right" to confiscate your money by any fair establishment, they will investigate further. Regardless, never did I read it was even because of VPN over there, but because of many accounts that acted alike.

Many accounts that acted alike, what's the proof? Anyone can say anything. Should we now believe everything? Why? Because a certain person we don't even know personally said it?

I'm still neutral on this. I just don't like people taking sides without valid proof. I hope you get me now.

[JeromeTash]

Let me clear you better on this matter, I am not on any side, I am neutral. All I know is that justice is not served with the way some people are taking it here. This is a peripheral media trial, it doesn't hold any water, yet, I like to only take a side when either of them could prove it without any reasonable doubt. None has done that, they are just saying. So, I remain neutral.

The support can provide some details showing why an account was flagged. Obviously they can't share everything in public but if the accuser is not satisfied or claims to be so innocent, they can use a third party mediator like askgamblers and I have seen issues get resolved.

Besides, VPN is not illegal in casinos, though, it is good to avoid it to avoid issues (that's if you know). You will contact many of them (casinos), and they will say they allow it.

Well, for Shuffle.com, it is illegal. If in any doubt. Just check their ToS. If indeed that person was innocent and just used only a VPN, then you can be sure his account got flagged because a similar IP address was used to create several other accounts to abuse the service. Casino abusers do this all the time, especially for bonus.

Also, KYC verification becomes hard. The IP address logs show that he is from one country, but the KYC documents show that he is from somewhere else.

What if the guy never knew but used it? Don't you think he could be ignorant?

Ignorant! 

I believe he was even ignorant to have stated it on that thread, and if it breaches their terms and conditions which I didn't read, then he is guilty. Nevertheless, cases are treated separately by a fair institution in case of ignorance. Many had used a VPN that breached Ts&Cs and was still fully settled when they traced that the gaming activities were entirely different. So, VPN usage is not the "right" to confiscate your money by any fair establishment, they will investigate further. Regardless, never did I read it was even because of VPN over there, but because of many accounts that acted alike.

If one can not even read the terms and conditions of a service, they are going to place their money in, then what is their purpose?

VPN usage is prohibited, but then you go ahead and use it. When the system flags your account, you still blame the casino?

Let's not just look at it only from the "victim's" side. Casinos also have a name to protect. I know there are legitimate concerns, but some of these accusations are also false and are targeted to blackmail the service. If sure someone is clean and innocent, they can get help from an independent arbitrator.

[JCLadisav]

The number of times I have been asked to post from my MAIN account is crazy. You guys realize you are openly threatening to attack my main account had I actually used it? LOL. This makes me feel good.

[yahoo62278]

The number of times I have been asked to post from my MAIN account is crazy. You guys realize you are openly threatening to attack my main account had I actually used it? LOL. This makes me feel good.

Noone is threatening to attack your main account. People are basically telling you that if you're too much of a pussy to post from your main, then we don't care about your issues. We unlike you, have the balls to post from our main accounts.

You will get 0 red trust for having an opinion dude. Quit living in fear.

[Learn Bitcoin]

Noone is threatening to attack your main account. People are basically telling you that if you're too much of a pussy to post from your main, then we don't care about your issues. We unlike you, have the balls to post from our main accounts.

You will get 0 red trust for having an opinion dude. Quit living in fear.

Does he have to care about what others telling him regarding which accounts he should use to say controversial things? The admin already allowed creating multiple accounts and the reason behind it is, if you fear to say something from your main account, just create another account and say it. I am not supporting him that he is creating accusations here and there without any strong proof or whatever proof he has, it's not enough to accuse someone.

But, whoever you guys telling him to use his main account to post it, you won't take responsibility if he gets negative feedback or a trust exclusion. Would you be able to remove the feedback, a neutral, or the trust exclusion? If not, why bother when someone creates an alt account to say something?

Note: I am not supporting his accusation, but tried to defend the idea of creating a alternative account which he created to say somehting controversial.

[Awaklara]

Every case of accusations of casino fraud will be resolved in stages. If it is resolved then the case is considered closed. resolved could mean the fault lies with the casino with the end of the refund or withdrawal. but the case can also be closed because the claim or accusation from the member to the casino cannot be proven. So funds will still be held following casino regulations.
The negative tag is also related to the efforts of casino users who want to cheat the casino in such cases.

Little Mouse is the marketing manager for Shuffle who also runs their campaign and hence should be considered an employee.

Regarding the campaign manager, actually not all problems related to the casino project will be delegated to the campaign manager. I don't know in the case of the casino you mean. however, more campaign managers only work to manage campaigns from casinos. not part of the team. If there is a problem related to the casino, we can contact the casino representative on the forum.

[EarnOnVictor]

What if the guy never knew but used it? Don't you think he could be ignorant?

Ignorant!  

Yes, ignorant! He could be.

But this way, I think you didn't get the gist. Before I wrote it then, I knew ignorance wasn't an excuse in law, but you seem not to get the context I used it for all the same.

For clarity's sake, it is ignorance in the sense that the guy was fighting for something and still claiming he used a VPN which is not allowed by the casino (guilty). This means that he mustn't have known he violated their terms and conditions through that, if not, he wouldn't have boldly stated it and still believed he committed no offence. Hence, I see it as ignorance on his part, a mere newbie who found himself in this mess. How many gamblers even read Ts&Cs?

Regardless, in such a situation, if investigated to be true, can still be resolved in his favour. That's if the casino is lenient. But the case here is beyond that, which is the issue.