Shuffle.com - Withdrawals Blocked and Cancelled After Legitimate Win

[holydarkness]

One should have the capability to see through, that at the moment, this servant of the forum is currently no longer of issue, Overseers is One that need to convice, and Overseers will reflect to One's act. One asked for audience, One asked for a glimpse of light to  be shone upon, and thus One is given. Though the servant of the forum plead One, that One's path is riddled, for the limelight is scorching.

[T1HGO]

holydarkness, i think i might need one of your famous special rulings.


Three days ago, i bought some underwear at decathlon, for my morning jogging routine. Confy sports underwear, made of nylon. Very nice.

However there was a problem. The underwear didn't fit me. My schlong was just too big, wcyd ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. I know, it's my bad for not trying them out at the store. I ackowledge that.

So here's the problem. They are not giving me a refund. Since the underwear itself isn't faulty, they refuse to refund just because i'm massive down there. So i am in a bit of a situation here.

So holydarkness, i need one of those special rulings you are known for. Can you please rule in my favor? Please, please, please? Pretty please? Just rule in my favor man, come on.

I am not guilty, i swear. The only thing i am guilty of, is having a massive schlong ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°).

Should i open my own thread?

Thank you for your attention to this matter.
T1HGO J. Trapeze.

[Rating Place]

Since holy is out, flag time? The match wasn’t fixed and the play came from one device.

Edit- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3519

[holydarkness]

Since holy is out, flag time? The match wasn’t fixed and the play came from one device.

Edit- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3519

So umm... this is your... solution and approach? "Flag time"? Not even trying to listen to what the other side need to say? Just listen to one side and then, "Flag time" yeaiii. And this come from someone who self-claimed that they've arbitrage far longer than me? In case it missed your understanding, arbitration is:

to act as arbiter upon (a disputed question) : to settle (a dispute between two people or groups) after hearing the arguments and opinions of both

keywords: hearing the arguments and opinions of both. Did you listen to arguments and opinion of both? I didn't see you ask Shuffle. Yet you claimed you've been arbitrating for years, far longer than me, and that [I recall this from the top of my head] you claimed that unlike me, you didn't brag all over it or something semantic.

No wonder you didn't mention it publicly. What you did is not arbitrating, it's not mediation, it's execution. You forced the power given upon you, the instance it's bestowed, to rule for one side without bother to account what the other side have to say. And now, if that's not an abuse of power and a total bias, what was it?

If you can't do a proper arbitration, just say the word, I'll take it back and do things properly.

I mean... you asked for the spotlight, and thus you're given, and once in the spotlight, you showed your true color.

OP, pvzera1, thought?

[Rating Place]

Since holy is out, flag time? The match wasn’t fixed and the play came from one device.

Edit- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3519

So umm... this is your... solution and approach? "Flag time"? Not even trying to listen to what the other side need to say? Just listen to one side and then, "Flag time" yeaiii. And this come from someone who self-claimed that they've arbitrage far longer than me? In case it missed your understanding, arbitration is:

to act as arbiter upon (a disputed question) : to settle (a dispute between two people or groups) after hearing the arguments and opinions of both

keywords: hearing the arguments and opinions of both. Did you listen to arguments and opinion of both? I didn't see you ask Shuffle. Yet you claimed you've been arbitrating for years, far longer than me, and that [I recall this from the top of my head] you claimed that unlike me, you didn't brag all over it or something semantic.

No wonder you didn't mention it publicly. What you did is not arbitrating, it's not mediation, it's execution. You forced the power given upon you, the instance it's bestowed, to rule for one side without bother to account what the other side have to say. And now, if that's not an abuse of power and a total bias, what was it?

If you can't do a proper arbitration, just say the word, I'll take it back and do things properly.

I mean... you asked for the spotlight, and thus you're given, and once in the spotlight, you showed your true color.

OP, pvzera1, thought?

I’ll do it. You backed out. It’s real simple. I’ll ask Shuffle what the player did wrong and tell them to show proof. Ask OP questions if needed. Do your own homework and look at the box score and game flow. It’s truly simple and easy.

If you will hand down my decision, I’ll do it. It will probably take 2 days.  I won’t make up my own rules or go outside of the accusation(s).

It’s a waste of my time if not binding.

[holydarkness]

I’ll do it. You backed out. It’s real simple. I’ll ask Shuffle what the player did wrong and tell them to show proof. Ask OP questions if needed. Do your own homework and look at the box score and game flow. It’s truly simple and easy.

If you will hand down my decision, I’ll do it. It will probably take 2 days.

"You backed out"? let me fix the grammar "you've backed out", "you have backed out". I've walked away simply because I find it hard to keep the thread stays in focus while you keep screaming "NO MATCH FIXING" every now and then. Guess what? "We know." It's been made clear from the other post. You're the only one who stick to "match fixing" while the others can easily grasp and comprehend the real nature of the case.

So... yeah, I've backed out. Though with your... "flag time" stunt that put your neutrality and mediation capability in a very questionable position, I won't be surprised if OP can't trust you. Hell, I won't be surprised if no one trust you, the "flag time" the instant you're handed the torch and without asking the other parties evidence is a very very gross --talking dark brown tar-consistency mud here-- negligence and abuse of mediator [who self-proclaimed himself that he's done it far longer than me].

Yeah, I'm still backing out. After all, it's OP's call who repel or bind me. Remember, I'm just a servant of this forum, and you... you just made a major debacle of your own reputation.

OP, pvzera1, if you ever consider to just shift back to me after such catastrophic gross failure of far-longer-than-you-in-mediating thing Rating Place said, mind to give him two more days? Two days he said, probably, to get the most neutral --well, I hope it's the most neutral verdict, backed by evidence, for your own sake, Joe-- verdict.

[Rating Place]

I’ll do it. You backed out. It’s real simple. I’ll ask Shuffle what the player did wrong and tell them to show proof. Ask OP questions if needed. Do your own homework and look at the box score and game flow. It’s truly simple and easy.

If you will hand down my decision, I’ll do it. It will probably take 2 days.

"You backed out"? let me fix the grammar "you've backed out", "you have backed out". I've walked away simply because I find it hard to keep the thread stays in focus while you keep screaming "NO MATCH FIXING" every now and then. Guess what? "We know." It's been made clear from the other post. You're the only one who stick to "match fixing" while the others can easily grasp and comprehend the real nature of the case.

So... yeah, I've backed out. Though with your... "flag time" stunt that put your neutrality and mediation capability in a very questionable position, I won't be surprised if OP can't trust you. Hell, I won't be surprised if no one trust you, the "flag time" the instant you're handed the torch and without asking the other parties evidence is a very very gross --talking dark brown tar-consistency mud here-- negligence and abuse of mediator [who self-proclaimed himself that he's done it far longer than me].

Yeah, I'm still backing out. After all, it's OP's call who repel or bind me. Remember, I'm just a servant of this forum, and you... you just made a major debacle of your own reputation.

OP, pvzera1, if you ever consider to just shift back to me after such catastrophic gross failure of far-longer-than-you-in-mediating thing Rating Place said, mind to give him two more days? Two days he said, probably, to get the most neutral --well, I hope it's the most neutral verdict, backed by evidence, for your own sake, Joe-- verdict.

lol. You’re wrong again. You backed out of the arbitrage is grammatically correct. I shortened it.

Don’t play grammar police when you don’t know the difference between slander and libel.

Hand down my decision and I’ll show you how it’s done in 2 days.

[pvzera1]

At this point, this case has already been going on for far too long, and I believe Shuffle has already had more than enough time and opportunity to present whatever evidence or rebuttal they claim to have.

From my perspective, I fully cooperated, provided everything requested from me, and answered every accusation raised throughout this process. Meanwhile, the core issue still remains unresolved.

So yes, I would prefer for holydarkness to return as mediator, if the objective now is to finally reach a conclusion and decision on the case, because this situation has already dragged on long enough.

[holydarkness]

I’ll do it. You backed out. It’s real simple. I’ll ask Shuffle what the player did wrong and tell them to show proof. Ask OP questions if needed. Do your own homework and look at the box score and game flow. It’s truly simple and easy.

If you will hand down my decision, I’ll do it. It will probably take 2 days.

"You backed out"? let me fix the grammar "you've backed out", "you have backed out". I've walked away simply because I find it hard to keep the thread stays in focus while you keep screaming "NO MATCH FIXING" every now and then. Guess what? "We know." It's been made clear from the other post. You're the only one who stick to "match fixing" while the others can easily grasp and comprehend the real nature of the case.

So... yeah, I've backed out. Though with your... "flag time" stunt that put your neutrality and mediation capability in a very questionable position, I won't be surprised if OP can't trust you. Hell, I won't be surprised if no one trust you, the "flag time" the instant you're handed the torch and without asking the other parties evidence is a very very gross --talking dark brown tar-consistency mud here-- negligence and abuse of mediator [who self-proclaimed himself that he's done it far longer than me].

Yeah, I'm still backing out. After all, it's OP's call who repel or bind me. Remember, I'm just a servant of this forum, and you... you just made a major debacle of your own reputation.

OP, pvzera1, if you ever consider to just shift back to me after such catastrophic gross failure of far-longer-than-you-in-mediating thing Rating Place said, mind to give him two more days? Two days he said, probably, to get the most neutral --well, I hope it's the most neutral verdict, backed by evidence, for your own sake, Joe-- verdict.

lol. You’re wrong again. You backed out of the arbitrage is grammatically correct. I shortened it.

Don’t play grammar police when you don’t know the difference between slander and libel.

Hand down my decision and I’ll show you how it’s done in 2 days.

"subject + have/has + V3" is present perfect tense, explaining that one has, at one point in the past, and continue to do so in the present. "I have backed out", means I backed out and still backed out.

"subject + v2" is simple past, describing a situation where someone did in the past and completed in the past, they're not continuously doing so. "you backed  out."

It's not shortening as it's two completely and perfectly different tenses that describe completely different situation.

"subject + have/has + been + v1 +ing" refers to what we call present perfect continuous tense, describe an action started in the past, continue to the present, and still happening as the time goes. For example: ".Rating Place has been not-braining". [of course, "not-braining" here is a slang].

Slander and libel, slander is spoken, libel is written. Slander includes "spoken" rumors, and in the eye of the law, its permanence is fleeting and/or temporary. Libel, a written defamatory published in public media, has a permanent grip, as they're recorded. You want me to consider your action to twist what GoT said as mine to be a libel while I consider them as slander --disregarding the medium, for practical purpose-- as I deemed it fleeting? You want it to be permanent?

About two days... well, it's up to OP, but know that you've given the spotlight, as you implicitly requested, and you've done so spectacularly under the spotlight. I don't think many will forget "flag time" for a really long time as a gross misconduct of a mediator.

At this point, this case has already been going on for far too long, and I believe Shuffle has already had more than enough time and opportunity to present whatever evidence or rebuttal they claim to have.

From my perspective, I fully cooperated, provided everything requested from me, and answered every accusation raised throughout this process. Meanwhile, the core issue still remains unresolved.

So yes, I would prefer for holydarkness to return as mediator, if the objective now is to finally reach a conclusion and decision on the case, because this situation has already dragged on long enough.

Your wish, my command. I'll pick where I left them off [thus, "I backed out", in sense that I left and now return upon request] and begin my attempt to reach Shuffle and ask for their evidence as rebuttal to your latest counter-evidence that put more weight to your scale.

Rating Place, find solace that your effort is not for naught. The entire overseers have seen your spectacular "flag time" moment. Now please leave this thread alone and don't pollute the progress with "no match fixing" propaganda because we all are already know about it.

[Rating Place]

What I will add about flags. The flags are warnings. They may go up before the game or in the middle of the game. It means there was an unusual betting pattern. The investigations occur later to determine if the match was fixed.


Since this is your first, when you do binding arbitrage, it’s similar to a court case. The OP has evidence that the match isn’t fixed. It would be a Summary Judgment. It means a trial is unnecessary.

Just look at the facts. You don’t have to ask more questions and nudge people.

[holydarkness]

What I will add about flags. The flags are warnings. They may go up before the game or in the middle of the game. It means there was an unusual betting pattern. The investigations occur later to determine if the match was fixed.


Since this is your first, when you do binding arbitrage, it’s similar to a court case. The OP has evidence that the match isn’t fixed. It would be a Summary Judgment. It means a trial is unnecessary.

Just look at the facts. You don’t have to ask more questions and nudge people.

The match was not fixed. THE MATCH WAS NOT FIXED. The "fixed match" allegation is just in your head. Every overseeers here already past that. The investigation is about the integrity of OP's account. Namely the possibility that OP colluded with someone to put bet on their behalf or lend their account for those entities so they can place the bet themselves.

That is what been investigated for like... many posts ago while you keep ranting match fixing. For your own reputation [as the more you repeat match fixing, the less people see you as sound person], stop.

[Rating Place]

What I will add about flags. The flags are warnings. They may go up before the game or in the middle of the game. It means there was an unusual betting pattern. The investigations occur later to determine if the match was fixed.


Since this is your first, when you do binding arbitrage, it’s similar to a court case. The OP has evidence that the match isn’t fixed. It would be a Summary Judgment. It means a trial is unnecessary.

Just look at the facts. You don’t have to ask more questions and nudge people.

The match was not fixed. THE MATCH WAS NOT FIXED. The "fixed match" allegation is just in your head. Every overseeers here already past that. The investigation is about the integrity of OP's account. Namely the possibility that OP colluded with someone to put bet on their behalf or lend their account for those entities so they can place the bet themselves.

That is what been investigated for like... many posts ago while you keep ranting match fixing. For your own reputation [as the more you repeat match fixing, the less people see you as sound person], stop.

Yes, everyone sees what’s going on. You keep changing allegations. This isn’t how arbitration is done and everyone sees it.

1. Match fixing

Added charges after posters said the player was innocent-


2. Integrity Betting. Made up gambling term and rule by holy.
3. Two people betting from same acount.
4. Now it’s collusion.


Read the rule that Shuffle quoted. That’s it.

 Bets may be suspended indefinitely if result integrity is in doubt. In cases of suspected match-fixing, Shuffle may delay or void settlements. ... Shuffle may also void bets at its sole discretion where credible suspicion of manipulation exists, even in the absence of official confirmation."

Shuffle uses the word “result” meaning the result of the game. “If result integrity is in doubt” . Look at the score of the game and determine if was played fair.

[pvzera1]

Any actual update yet, or is this just turning into another day of Shuffle dragging this out instead of paying what they owe me?