Flag Support Request - nutildah Trust Abuse

[kingbj21]

FLAG: nutildah violated implied community standards and abused trust system

VIOLATION SUMMARY:

nutildah systematically defends provably fraudulent casino operations while filing FALSE trust ratings against legitimate complainants, prioritizing advertiser revenue over community protection.

SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS:

1. Defense of Mathematical Fraud
   • BetFury casino operates with 71% BTTC RTP (should be 99%+)
   • 13,998 bets analyzed showing 93.54σ deviation (impossible in fair play)
   • Monte Carlo: 0/10,000 fair simulations matched observed results
   • nutildah defended this despite overwhelming mathematical proof

2. Intellectual Fraud - ChatGPT Abuse
   • Used AI to generate fake "expert" statistical response
   • Claimed my analysis used "biased Markov chains" (blackjack hands are independent, not Markovian - fundamental error proving AI use)
   • Filled response with misused technical terms to appear credible
   • Zero actual calculations provided
   • When challenged, cannot answer basic statistical questions

3. False Trust Rating Abuse
   • Filed negative trust against me with accomplices
   • Coordinated retaliation for exposing BetFury fraud
   • Abuse of trust system to silence legitimate complaints
   • No actual scam occurred - purely retaliatory

4. Financial Conflicts of Interest
   • BetFury runs signature campaigns on forum
   • nutildah defends them despite mathematical proof of fraud
   • Pattern of switching campaigns before operators exposed
   • Acts as "casino pimp" protecting fraudulent operations
   • Community protection subordinated to financial interests

5. Forum Manipulation
   • My mathematical rebuttals deleted while his attacks remain
   • Uses position to suppress evidence of advertiser fraud
   • Protects revenue sources over user safety
   • Coordinates with moderators to censor critics

EVIDENCE:

Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5563800

Mathematical Analysis:
- 13,998 documented BetFury transactions
- Win rate: 89.03% (expected 49.5%) = 93.54 standard deviations
- USDT RTP: 94.08% (expected 99%+) = 38 SE outside confidence interval
- BTTC RTP: 71.15% (worse than lottery at 50%)
- Currency discrimination: 99% BFG vs 71% BTTC (same games)

nutildah's "Refutation":
- Zero calculations with my data
- ChatGPT-generated buzzword salad
- "Markov chains" claim proves statistical illiteracy
- Cannot answer basic statistical challenges
- Pure ad hominem without substance

IMPLIED AGREEMENT VIOLATED:

Community members implicitly agree to:
✓ Honest evaluation of evidence
✓ Protection of users over advertisers
✓ Fair use of trust system
✓ Intellectual honesty in debates

nutildah violated ALL of these by:
✗ Defending mathematical fraud
✗ Prioritizing advertiser revenue
✗ Filing false retaliatory trust ratings
✗ Using AI to fake expertise

HARM TO COMMUNITY:

- Users misled about casino safety
- Legitimate complaints suppressed
- Trust system weaponized against victims
- Forum credibility damaged
- Future victims unprotected

FINANCIAL MOTIVATION:

nutildah has clear financial interest in defending BetFury:
- Signature campaign revenue
- Potential referral payments
- Advertising relationships
- Moderator kickbacks (possible)

PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR:

This is not isolated incident. nutildah:
- Switches signature campaigns before exposure
- Defends multiple gambling operations
- Uses trust system against critics
- Coordinates with other casino defenders
- Prioritizes money over community

REQUEST:

Support this flag to:
✓ Warn community about financially-motivated "reviews"
✓ Prevent trust system abuse against legitimate complaints
✓ Discourage defense of provable fraud
✓ Protect future victims

EVIDENCE ARCHIVE:

All statistical analysis, forum censorship documentation, nutildah's ChatGPT response, and mathematical proofs available publicly and backed up.

This user prioritizes casino advertising revenue over community protection and abuses trust system to silence critics of fraud.

[yahoo62278]

Should we now expect 7 more threads calling out the other 7 whom have tagged you as well? Do you really think anyone is going to give your thread a second look? Honestly man, you're tagged by multiple users for being a blackmailer and apparently a retard, loser, and an idiot. Nutildah's tag is fairly calm compared to some of the others.

[Vod]

I +Pulsed because others should learn from this.  The non-starter is your -9 from default trust.   Tells me right away you don't have a sincere problem with Nutildah, but an annoyance problem.   Where did the other -8 come from?

[Kavelj22]

Waaw! How much time it took you to write all this bullshit? You have not provided a single piece of evidence for any of these claims. I have just notice after checking the link you mentioned that you used to play longtime at the keyboard. Maybe just out of fun.

You have 9 trusted negative feedbacks and 4 untrusted negative feedbacks, why you choose only Nutildah to attack him with your bullshit accusations? Many other users posted in that thread you used as reference. What do you expect after posting this? I am really curious to know your logic.

This thread can serve as a reference for more red tags in your profile as you falsely attack an active user reputation and falsely attack a well-known brand reputation.

[Vod]

You have 9 trusted negative feedbacks and 4 untrusted negative feedbacks

If I may remind the honourable Kavelj22, untrusted feedback is irrelevant. 

[Free Market Capitalist]

Waaw! How much time it took you to write all this bullshit?

Not that much. I've run the text through gptzero AI detector and it gives a mixed result 55% AI.

I feel like adding another tag to his profile, but I don't think it would add anything, and he's already making a fool of himself with this thread.

[JeromeTash]

Another useless kingbj21 thread that is most likely going to be deleted in the near future by the poster himself, just like he did in the past. I think members are right when they say that you are mentally retarded.

Waaw! How much time it took you to write all this bullshit? You have not provided a single piece of evidence for any of these claims.

Not much when he decided to use ChatGPT and just copy and paste.

You have 9 trusted negative feedbacks and 4 untrusted negative feedbacks, why you choose only Nutildah to attack him with your bullshit accusations?

I guess he is trying to retaliate for this - Flag for kingbj21

[Zoomic]

Dude, you would have done this with a new and clean account. Your 10 -ve tags made me not to read your thread. I rather read your feedbacks and many people said the same thing about you.

[Majestic-milf]

Dude, you would have done this with a new and clean account. Your 10 -ve tags made me not to read your thread. I rather read your feedbacks and many people said the same thing about you.

I agree with you because all this time he's using to create threads that won't even last before getting ignored or deleted, he would have used it to do something more profitable, except for him "something profitable" means looking for the next naive person to sell his crooked thoughts to or look for a casino he can bleed with his lies.

[kingbj21]

TO THE COORDINATED CASINO DEFENSE SQUAD:

Interesting how SEVEN casino shills appeared to defend nutildah without addressing a SINGLE mathematical fact.

Let me address each statistical illiterate individually:


YAHOO62278: "Multiple users tagged you"

RESPONSE:

Yes, multiple casino campaign participants coordinated retaliatory tags after I exposed Casino's fraud.

Notice what you DIDN'T address:
- Is 93.54σ deviation possible in fair play? (Answer: No)
- Is 71% BTTC RTP acceptable? (Answer: No)
- Did nutildah use ChatGPT? (Answer: Yes - "Markov chains" proves it)

Your casino campaigns: (List them if known)

QUESTION: How much does Casinos pay you to defend fraud?


VOD: "You have -9 from default trust"

RESPONSE:

Yes, from coordinated casino shills retaliating for exposing fraud.

Mathematical fact doesn't care about trust scores:
- 93.54 standard deviations = impossible by chance
- Probability < 10^(-1000)
- 0/10,000 Monte Carlo simulations matched

CHALLENGE: Calculate the probability of 89% win rate over 13,998 blackjack hands.

Can't? Then your opinion on my trust score is irrelevant.

QUESTION: Do you participate in casino signature campaigns? Disclose your conflicts.


KAVELJ22: "Not a single piece of evidence"

RESPONSE:

Are you blind or lying?

EVIDENCE PROVIDED:
✓ 13,998 documented transactions
✓ Complete statistical analysis
✓ Monte Carlo simulation (code available)
✓ Z-score: 93.54σ
✓ Chi-square: 8,748.98
✓ Binomial p-value: < 10^(-1000)
✓ Currency discrimination data
✓ RTP by currency: BFG 99%, USDT 94%, BTTC 71%

YOUR EVIDENCE:
✗ Zero calculations
✗ Zero refutation
✗ Just "bullshit" repeated 3 times

QUESTION: Can you calculate a Z-score? Clearly not.

Your casino campaigns: (Probably multiple)


FREE MARKET CAPITALIST: "55% AI according to gptzero"

RESPONSE:

HILARIOUS considering:

1. nutildah's response was 100% ChatGPT
   • Claimed "Markov chains" (wrong - blackjack hands independent)
   • Zero calculations provided
   • Pure buzzword soup

2. I provided actual mathematical analysis
   • Calculations with real numbers
   • Python simulation code
   • Verifiable statistical tests

3. AI detectors are unreliable
   • False positives common
   • 55% = inconclusive
   • Doesn't invalidate mathematics

CHALLENGE: Explain what a Markov chain is and why nutildah's claim was wrong.

Can't? Then shut up about AI.

QUESTION: What casino campaigns do you run? Disclose.


JEROMETASH: "Mentally retarded"

RESPONSE:

Ad hominem = admission you have no mathematical argument.

I'm "retarded" but I can:
✓ Calculate Z-scores (93.54σ)
✓ Run Monte Carlo simulations (0/10,000)
✓ Apply binomial probability (p < 10^-1000)
✓ Identify ChatGPT fraud ("Markov chains")

You're "smart" but you can't:
✗ Refute a single calculation
✗ Answer basic statistical questions
✗ Understand independent events
✗ Think beyond casino talking points

QUESTION: Which casinos pay you? Full disclosure.


ZOOMIC: "Your 10 -ve tags made me not read"

RESPONSE:

Translation: "I'm too lazy to evaluate evidence."

The mathematics don't care about your reading habits:
- 93.54σ = impossible
- 71% BTTC RTP = fraud
- Monte Carlo = validates impossibility

QUESTION: If you didn't read the evidence, why comment?

Oh right - casino campaigns require defending fraud.


MAJESTIC-MILF: "Crooked thoughts... bleed casinos with lies"

RESPONSE:

Which part is "lies"?

- 13,998 documented bets? (Verifiable)
- 93.54σ calculation? (Mathematical fact)
- 71% BTTC RTP? (Observable data)
- nutildah's "Markov chains" error? (Proven ChatGPT fraud)

CHALLENGE: Point to ONE "lie" and prove it's false with mathematics.

You can't. Because mathematics aren't lies.

QUESTION: How many casino campaigns have you participated in?


THE PATTERN IS OBVIOUS:

SEVEN casino shills appeared within hours to:
✗ Attack me personally
✗ Ignore mathematical evidence
✗ Defend proven fraud
✗ Coordinate negative tags
✗ Provide ZERO calculations
✗ Refuse to disclose conflicts

NOT ONE addressed:
- Is 93.54σ possible in fair play?
- Is 71% BTTC RTP acceptable?
- Why did nutildah claim "Markov chains"?
- Can any of you calculate a Z-score?


TO THE HONEST COMMUNITY:

Watch this pattern:

When casino fraud is exposed with mathematics:
1. Casino campaign participants coordinate attack
2. File retaliatory negative trust
3. Use ad hominem (retard, idiot, blackmailer)
4. Ignore all mathematical evidence
5. Never provide calculations
6. Protect advertiser revenue over users

This proves:
✓ Forum prioritizes casino revenue
✓ Trust system weaponized against victims
✓ Statistical evidence systematically ignored
✓ Casino shills coordinate defenses
✓ No honest evaluation of evidence

SEVEN "different" users, ZERO mathematical rebuttals.


THE CHALLENGE (REISSUED):

To ANY of the seven casino shills above:

Answer with MATHEMATICS:

1. Calculate probability of 89% win rate over 13,998 hands (p=0.495)
2. Calculate 95% confidence interval for n=6,678, RTP=99%
3. Determine if 94% RTP falls within that interval
4. Explain what a Markov chain is
5. Explain why blackjack hands are NOT Markovian
6. Calculate Z-score for 12,462 wins out of 13,998 trials

Rules:
- Show your work
- Provide equations
- Use actual numbers
- No ChatGPT
- No ad hominem

If you cannot answer (and you cannot):

Then admit you're statistically illiterate casino shills protecting fraud for money.


DISCLOSURE DEMANDED:

Each of you must disclose:

1. Current casino signature campaigns
2. Past casino affiliations (last 2 years)
3. Referral relationships with casinos
4. Any compensation from gambling operations
5. Financial ties to BetFury specifically

Failure to disclose = admission of conflict of interest


FINAL STATEMENT:

SEVEN casino shills cannot refute basic mathematics.

93.54 standard deviations.
71% BTTC RTP.
0/10,000 Monte Carlo simulations.
13,998 documented transactions.

These are facts, not opinions.

Your coordinated attack proves:
✓ You prioritize casino money over truth
✓ You cannot engage with evidence
✓ You weaponize trust against victims
✓ You protect fraud for profit

The mathematics don't lie.
Seven casino shills do.

Respond with EQUATIONS or admit you're paid defenders of fraud.


P.S. TO MODERATORS:

Notice how users appeared to defend nutildah?

This coordinated attack against legitimate mathematical evidence proves:
- Forum protects advertiser revenue
- Casino campaigns coordinate defenses
- Trust system weaponized
- Statistical evidence systematically suppressed

If you delete this while keeping their coordinated attack, you prove complicity.

[Zwei]

bla bla bla

you should have kept your word and left the forum if you can't handle people saying you are a retard, which you keep proving with every post.

to anyone who is not familiar with this idiot and his other idiot friend from the scam accusations board (who is probably going to show up here soon), it's best to just ignore them.

[Vod]

VOD: "You have -9 from default trust"

RESPONSE:

Yes, from coordinated casino shills retaliating for exposing fraud.

Mathematical fact doesn't care about trust scores:
- 93.54 standard deviations = impossible by chance
- Probability < 10^(-1000)
- 0/10,000 Monte Carlo simulations matched

CHALLENGE: Calculate the probability of 89% win rate over 13,998 blackjack hands.

Can't? Then your opinion on my trust score is irrelevant.

Can you understand I don't care about gambling odds?   Can't?  Your complaint is irrelevant.   

[yahoo62278]

bla bla bla

you should have kept your word and left the forum if you can't handle people saying you are a retard, which you keep proving with every post.

to anyone who is not familiar with this idiot and his other idiot friend from the scam accusations board (who is probably going to show up here soon), it's best to just ignore them.

Sometimes feeding the troll is entertaining so I find myself unwilling to ignore them at times. What's sad about this particular troll is they look like they have somewhat of a brain, but refuse to accept there is no sure fire guaranteed way to always win.

For example playing x2 on dice. This dude seems to think it's statistically impossible to have 10 losses in a row when in fact it is quite common. Also possible to have 7+ wins in a row on x2.

Some of the shit he spews could be true, but he screws it up by posting a bunch of shit trying to look smart and just makes him come off as ignorant. Should just post facts. Is the casino cheating players? If yes, how? Don't tell me there's a 74.2% chance of something being something that who fucking cares. Show me proof the casino cheats. Statistics are not proof.

[kingbj21]

bla bla bla

you should have kept your word and left the forum if you can't handle people saying you are a retard, which you keep proving with every post.
to anyone who is not familiar with this idiot and his other idiot friend from the scam accusations board (who is probably going to show up here soon), it's best to just ignore them.

I'll leave the forum the day crypto casinos stop manipulating RTP, running unethical operations, and destroying player communities with rigged games, ghosting support, and false "provably fair" claims. Until then, exposing this shit is exactly why forums like this exist.

You aggressively defended BetFury back when you had their signature campaign, pushing their "fairness" narrative hard. Now? Crickets on BetFury, suddenly all in on Duelbits promotions. Why the switch? Did BetFury stop paying, or did too many players start posting undeniable evidence of unfair RTP drops and ignored tickets? Players notice when shills jump ship right before (or during) heat.

Sometimes feeding the troll is entertaining so I find myself unwilling to ignore them at times. What's sad about this particular troll is they look like they have somewhat of a brain, but refuse to accept there is no sure fire guaranteed way to always win.
For example playing x2 on dice. This dude seems to think it's statistically impossible to have 10 losses in a row when in fact it is quite common. Also possible to have 7+ wins in a row on x2.
Some of the shit he spews could be true, but he screws it up by posting a bunch of shit trying to look smart and just makes him come off as ignorant. Should just post facts. Is the casino cheating players? If yes, how? Don't tell me there's a 74.2% chance of something being something that who fucking cares. Show me proof the casino cheats. Statistics are not proof.

@ yahoo62278 — nobody's claiming there's a "sure fire way to always win." That's a strawman. The issue is when observed results (e.g., massive win streaks or RTP crashes far beyond expected variance) have probabilities so low they're effectively impossible under fair play assumptions—like 0/10,000 simulations matching real outcomes, or deviations of 90+ standard errors.

Statistics ARE proof when done right: they quantify how unlikely something is under the null hypothesis (fair RNG). If P ≈ 0 for a player's session under claimed RTP/house edge, that's evidence of deviation/rigging worth investigating—not "who fucking cares." Dismissing binomial probabilities, Monte Carlo validations, and Z-scores as irrelevant is just anti-intellectual hand-waving.

As for "show me proof the casino cheats": the burden isn't only on players. Let casinos prove they're NOT rigging:

- Publish full, verifiable seed data + server/client hashes for disputed games (not just "provably fair" checkboxes).
- Release aggregated RTP data per game/currency over large samples (real player data, not cherry-picked).
- Explain sudden RTP drops or why support vanishes on big wins while promo emails keep spamming deposits.
- Independent audits with public reports (not internal claims).

Crypto casinos are no saints—most operate under Curaçao licenses with minimal oversight, history of exit scams, limits on winners, and opaque RNG. BetFury claims up to 99.28% RTP on originals? Fine words, but without transparency when challenged, it's marketing. Players get wrecked, communities suffer addiction/fraud fallout, yet shills defend for paychecks.

If casinos have nothing to hide, step up with real data/proof instead of silence or ad hominems. Until then, calling out the patterns isn't trolling—it's accountability.

[LoyceV]

I guess he is trying to retaliate for this - Flag for kingbj21

It's funny, because he forgot to create the Flag he wants us to Support

[kingbj21]

I guess he is trying to retaliate for this - Flag for kingbj21

It's funny, because he forgot to create the Flag he wants us to Support

I want to clarify something, because this keeps getting framed as retaliation or an attempt to harm someone’s livelihood — that is not the intent.

The goal here is to bring attention to a recurring issue that keeps getting dismissed in this forum: the blind trust placed in “provably fair” claims, especially when it comes to in-house / original casino games.

I did not create a flag deliberately. A flag directly impacts revenue and turns the discussion into defense mode instead of analysis. The intention here is to highlight behavior and technical risk so it does not continue unchecked, particularly when people expose scams or questionable practices.

The problem is that this community often treats crypto casinos as if they are inherently trustworthy, while many members have never:
- tested edge cases,
- audited implementations,
- or experienced how easily original games can be manipulated behind a “provably fair” label.

To add technical context, I’m quoting a post from a developer with long-term iGaming experience. This is not emotional speculation — it’s how poorly implemented systems are actually abused.

Before anyone asks — I’m not the OP.
I only made an account there after seeing this thread.

I’ve been in iGaming dev for 12 years.
I know how these systems are supposed to work and I know exactly how they get rigged.

So here’s the quick version, no fluff:

1. Is Winna a scam?
Yes. Not “maybe,” not “feels like.” Yes.

2. Do they manipulate their in-house games?
Yes. The outcomes are not purely driven by the provably fair chain.

3. Should you trust “provably fair” by default?
No.
“Provably fair” only proves the result matches the seed they chose, not that the seed wasn’t selected to make you lose.

Provably fair does NOT guarantee randomness.
It only guarantees that the final output matches the inputs.
If the inputs are manipulated, the fairness verification means nothing.

These guys are using old, cheap operator tricks:
- Skipping nonces when the seed leads to a high payout run
- Dynamic loss triggers when payout exceeds a threshold
- Static loss blocks to quietly raise effective house edge
- Legacy code still present in the backend

This isn’t high-effort fraud.
This is bargain-bin operator behavior.

Provably fair works like this:
server_seed (committed hash)
+ client_seed
+ nonce
→ RNG output → game result

If every input is honest and the nonce increments strictly (0,1,2,3…),
that’s how reputable platforms handle it.

The exploit happens when the house controls:
- server seed selection
- seed rotation timing
- whether the client seed is actually used
- nonce progression

They simulate outcomes privately and publish only the one that benefits the house.
Verification still passes because it only checks consistency, not intent.

Nonce skipping example:
Simulate nonce 12 → win → discard
Simulate nonce 13 → win → discard
Simulate nonce 14 → loss → publish

To the player:
Nonce 14, loss, verifier passes.

To reality:
Two winning outcomes were skipped.

This is the core issue.

Provably fair is not a guarantee of fairness.
It is a deterministic verification system that depends entirely on honest implementation.

The question isn’t whether casinos can do this — they can.
The question is whether the forum should keep dismissing these concerns just because verification passes.

This is about awareness and accountability, not revenge.

[LoyceV]

I did not create a flag deliberately.

That makes no sense, considering your topic title to Support the Flag.

A flag directly impacts revenue

No it doesn't.

“Provably fair” only proves the result matches the seed they chose, not that the seed wasn’t selected to make you lose.

That's a weak argument. If that would be true, you could win by picking the opposite outcome.

[kingbj21]

I did not create a flag deliberately.

That makes no sense, considering your topic title to Support the Flag.

A flag directly impacts revenue

No it doesn't.

“Provably fair” only proves the result matches the seed they chose, not that the seed wasn’t selected to make you lose.

That's a weak argument. If that would be true, you could win by picking the opposite outcome.

To clarify: I never intended to create a flag or cause any financial harm to this member. I’m fully aware that negative trust can affect someone’s ability to borrow or trade on the forum, and that wasn’t my goal at all.

I’m relatively new to how flags, the reputation system, and support mechanics work here. I mostly post in the Scam Accusations section when I come across casinos that ignore responsible gambling practices. My focus has always been on helping victims stand up to crypto casinos that operate with little to no accountability or regulatory oversight. This forum is one of the few places where they can actually be challenged, since most of them originated here and still care about their reputation on Bitcointalk.

“Provably fair” only proves the result matches the seed they chose, not that the seed wasn’t selected to make you lose.

That's a weak argument. If that would be true, you could win by picking the opposite outcome.
[/quote]

Look, about that "pick the opposite" thing – it only really works if the casino is stuck using a strict nonce that goes 0,1,2,3... no skips, and they can't simulate stuff ahead of time. But in a lot of these shady setups, they have full control over when to rotate seeds or how the nonce moves, so they can run simulations, toss out the ones where players win big, and just publish the losing sequence. You betting opposite wouldn't do because you're already seeing the rigged result – the verifier just checks it matches, not if it was fairly picked.

Honestly, I think with bigger bets, yeah, some places probably have extra "checks" in the backend to tilt things their way without making it obvious across all games. That's how they protect the house on high stakes.

To actually get some trust going, these casinos should just open up and share real aggregated stats – like overall RTP numbers from massive sample sizes, or even full public histories for their in-house games so anyone can crunch the numbers. Most of 'em don't even give you proper verifiable history beyond your own recent bets, which makes it impossible for us to properly audit if it's fair over the long run.

If they did that kinda transparency, it'd separate the legit ones from those hiding behind "provably fair" as some kinda of marketing shield. Right now it's too easy for doubts to stick around. I'm no iGaming dev, I don't know anyone on the inside, and I've got no axe to grind beyond this: my opinion comes purely from playing thousands upon thousands of hands on original blackjack games (and other in-house titles) across a bunch of different crypto casinos over the years. The patterns I've seen with my own eyes are what make me skeptical, nothing more complicated than that.

[nutildah]

This person seems have to shifted gears or else AI prompts.

My focus has always been on helping victims stand up to crypto casinos that operate with little to no accountability or regulatory oversight.

Can you please provide one instance where you actually did this?

You're from the game-protect school of "spray verbal diarrhea around everywhere and wait for a payout," which is a terrible business model. You're no different from a crooked casino operator as you're both the same kind of person at the end of the day: a shitbird using their time on planet earth to scam other shitbirds.