Can we look into inspace feedback activities and his quick red tag to degencom?

[AB de Royse777]

WHO IS INSPACE
Name:   inspace
Posts:   2201
Activity:   896
Merit:   1537
Position:   Legendary
Trust:   +5 / =2 / -0[/b]
I expect he is in DT/DT1.

@Whale wrote: 2025-08-18 Reference   

nspace has been a long time contributor to our signature campaign and has also launched dozens of weekly Whale events. We appreciate everything you do, especially your punctuality. Thank you!

icopress wrote: 2025-06-25  without reference

Ideal communication and a great example of an ideal assistant who understands you at a glance.

paid2 wrote: 2025-02-21  without reference

I've won several contests and games organized by inspace, and I've always received the prize quickly and without any problems.

Let's take screenshot of the feedback earned both trusted and untrusted


It worth to pay attention that the half of the feedback are from circle of ideal assistant.

Let's look into the POSITIVE feedback he sent:


Again we see circle of ideal assistant and their positive feedback between each others. I understand in campaign management we have these assistant things, fan things around, I am fine with that. With above I wanted to make a point only that it is true, the ideal assistant and manager fan things are true.


NEGATIVE FEEDBACK
I was notified to look into a red tag left for degencom. The accusation against them is Degen. $601 in bets voided, deposit refunded. SCAM, a $601 accusation and I understand it can be a lot of money for some. I had a quick scan on the accusation topic and my question is - did we have a initiation in looking after this accusation and for a solution? I don't see there are much development in the accusation topic.

However, it seems like inspace was quick to leave a red tag to degencom.


Is this red tag justified yet?

[PX-Z]

It's a common feedback for anyone who get scam accusations with proofs, especially way back before.
Personally, i think an immediate red tag can sometimes be too harsh. A neutral tag could be used initially to warn others while giving the accused an opportunity to resolve the issue. If they fail to provide a fair resolution, turning it to red tag would be justified.

[inspace]

I double chacked everything and everything seems corect. Once the open accusation of fraud is resolved, I'll naturally change the tag to neutral.

But I can't understand why you created the thread and what you're getting at. I would have answered the same thing if you'd asked me via private message. If you'd like to hire me, I'd be happy to be your assistant and manage even more weekly events.

[Little Mouse]

I double chacked everything and everything seems corect. Once the open accusation of fraud is resolved, I'll naturally change the tag to neutral.

But I can't understand why you created the thread and what you're getting at. I would have answered the same thing if you'd asked me via private message. If you'd like to hire me, I'd be happy to be your assistant and manage even more weekly events.

You (together with some other persons) have been attacking my clients for a long time by putting negative tags on them while you don't have the guts to put negative tag on other same type scam accusation. Such a shady behaviour! I know where's this coming from though, they are lucky that I'm not a dirty player in the field. If they would practice the minimal ethics, they wouldn’t choose the dirty game.

I have shared your shady behavior with Royse and he decided to create this thread.

If you'd like to hire me, I'd be happy to be your assistant and manage even more weekly events.

I know Royse for long time and I'm sure that Royse won't hire such a shady practicing person for sure.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Since my feedback is quoted in the OP, I have to say that I think this bloke is trustworthy when it comes to financial deals. As you can see in the reference link (if you use a translator) he appeared in the Spanish section, he had no positive feedback and was a lower-ranked member back then. I was very skeptical about the deal at first. I did what he asked me to do, and by the time the flowers had arrived, he could easily have disappeared from the forum and not paid me the amount he’d promised. He was a nobody on the forum at the time. However, he did send me the promised payment. So, I trust him and stand by my feedback.

Now, as for the matter of concern here:

Once the open accusation of fraud is resolved, I'll naturally change the tag to neutral.

It would probably have been better to lead with a neutral tag instead of negative, then change it to red or delete it depending on how things go.

[eternalgloom]

I double chacked everything and everything seems corect. Once the open accusation of fraud is resolved, I'll naturally change the tag to neutral.

But I can't understand why you created the thread and what you're getting at. I would have answered the same thing if you'd asked me via private message. If you'd like to hire me, I'd be happy to be your assistant and manage even more weekly events.

$601 is a significant amount of money. But it's just as important to follow the proper process and let the facts come first.

We always try to protect those we know, and if someone is outside we will attack them.

I've always said we need more transparency when it comes to leaving red trust. We are all abusing our power, it only makes this community more toxic.

Until a case is properly investigated, a neutral tag is the more reasonable way to warn other

[xLays]

I double chacked everything and everything seems corect. Once the open accusation of fraud is resolved, I'll naturally change the tag to neutral.

But I can't understand why you created the thread and what you're getting at. I would have answered the same thing if you'd asked me via private message. If you'd like to hire me, I'd be happy to be your assistant and manage even more weekly events.

Don't get me wrong. I guess what Royce is trying to say, in short without even saying it directly, is that if you tag a casino like you did with Degen.com, make sure you do the same thing for every casino with the same kind of case.

There are so many casinos out there that have the same cases as the ones you tagged negatively, but you didn't tag them. What's stopping you from doing the same thing?

[inspace]

You (together with some other persons) have been attacking my clients for a long time by putting negative tags on them while you don't have the guts to put negative tag on other same type scam accusation. Such a shady behaviour! I know where's this coming from though, they are lucky that I'm not a dirty player in the field. If they would practice the minimal ethics, they wouldn’t choose the dirty game.

Are you even listening to yourself? It's not my fault that your clients are scammers.
Now I understand the whole situation better after looking at your feedback wall.

1. You're playing the good guy because it benefits you.
2. You are literally abusing your position DT. You added me to distrust list despite legitimate feedback about fraud, just because he's your client.
3. You called your friends because you understand the consequences of openly defending a scammer.
4. You literally destroyed another user's reputation because you were conducting experiments.

It's RapTarX whom I quoted, he was an easy pick because I saw his ranked had changed and I wanted to add something that would feel real but it could be someone else too. I wanted to say this many times, right at that moment too but sadly I couldn’t. I was afraid of being humiliated.

5. Even before this confession, you literally marked the user with a red tag to divert attention from your person.



Each of these points except the first is a compelling argument for you to be excluded from the default trust system.

~Little Mouse

For this reason, I'm adding you to my distrust list and recommending others do the same.

[Free Market Capitalist]

~

You haven't addressed the main point here.

There are so many casinos out there that have the same cases as the ones you tagged negatively, but you didn't tag them. What's stopping you from doing the same thing?

I don't know about the other casinos but you have tagged the casino I represent now. If you can prove to me that the casino is a scam, I'll leave the campaign right away. I recently left a campaign because I didn't like things at the casino (not anything about scams but I could see that some aspects were managed in a too amateurish way). Also, it wouldn't be for me the first or second time I leave or am kicked out of a campaign because I don't agree with something.

But I have you in my trust list and see that you have left a red tag based on one case that is still going on.

Why haven't you red tagged Rainbet, for example? There are so many such accusations on that section on so many casinos that you haven't tagged that it is clear that this is more a part of the behind-the-scenes battle among managers than a tag based on objective reasons.

[Little Mouse]

Each of these points except the first is a compelling argument for you to be excluded from the default trust system.

~Little Mouse

For this reason, I'm adding you to my distrust list and recommending others do the same.

That's what we call retaliatory but I don't give your stand a fuc* Welcome to my ignore list. Go ahead, ask your shady group to do the same.

~

You haven't addressed the main point here.

Did you expect them to address? Oh come on. They have been abusing the trust system for long time.

[LoyceV]

WHO IS INSPACE
~snip~

This is.... weird! Based on the title, you've created this topic because of negative feedback on degencom. But you start with a very long explanation of all the feedback he received and sent.

Again we see circle of ideal assistant and their positive feedback between each others. I understand in campaign management we have these assistant things, fan things around, I am fine with that. With above I wanted to make a point only that it is true, the ideal assistant and manager fan things are true.

Again: what a weird thing to say.

I was notified to look into a red tag left for degencom.

By whom, if you don't mind me asking? This topic reeks like you have skin in the game.

The accusation against them is Degen. $601 in bets voided, deposit refunded. SCAM, a $601 accusation and I understand it can be a lot of money for some. I had a quick scan on the accusation topic and my question is - did we have a initiation in looking after this accusation and for a solution? I don't see there are much development in the accusation topic.

However, it seems like inspace was quick to leave a red tag to degencom.

Quick? I'd say 4 days after a scam accusation is quite slow. What more do you want if there's no response for 4 days?
Why didn't you post this in Degen. $601 in bets voided, deposit refunded. SCAM instead of a new topic?

Is this red tag justified yet?

Yes. See my post in that topic.

You (together with some other persons) have been attacking my clients for a long time by putting negative tags on them while you don't have the guts to put negative tag on other same type scam accusation. Such a shady behaviour!

The plot thickens: nobody said anything about "your client" until you said so. I see a plausible looking scam accusation, and instead of addressing why "your client" doesn't pay up, you attack the person who tags "your client"?

I have shared your shady behavior with Royse and he decided to create this thread.

Sounds a lot like shooting the messenger.

Until a case is properly investigated, a neutral tag is the more reasonable way to warn other

Why? I see a pretty clear case: casino offers bets, player takes bets, casino says player wasn't allowed to take the bets he chose, casino takes player's money. All based on their Terms.
The player had a good point: "How can I figure out what to bet on?" if the casino decides the player is at fault when they have to pay.

Don't get me wrong. I guess what Royce is trying to say, in short without even saying it directly, is that if you tag a casino like you did with Degen.com, make sure you do the same thing for every casino with the same kind of case.

That's an unfair demand to make. Nobody can follow all cases, and nobody is required to act on all cases. I, for instance, only respond to a fraction of all the Scam accusations.