Not sure if Hungerstyle is innocent, but I am sure that Directbet is guilty of handling this situation very poorly. Feel free to repost this wherever if anyone likes.
Last fall for about a month maybe 1 out of every 20 transactions from my electrum wallet were showing up as double spends and it was completely unintentional (eventually realized i needed to update software) There were no big problems because they were all involving individuals or sites that require 1 confirmation.
In the end, one would confirm and the other was eventually deleted from the block chain.
If I had deposited on DirectBet, could I have ended up getting freerolled like Hungerstyle?
There are two still in my Betcoin transaction history with invalid transaction ids:
![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.gyazo.com%2F2b120d81e03553f0fc365ae9047bc652.png&t=663&c=B93Q5smw3FmyYg)
This transaction is unknown.
You might have used wrong transaction hash, or the transaction you're looking for hasn't yet propagated through the network. It can take a while for transactions to get to blockchain nodes.
My point is, obviously I don't think any site can justify not paying out a winning bet after the fact because of a double unconfirmed transaction and a suspicion.
If they have enough evidence to justify seizing 36 bitcoin from a player, they should be prepared to defend their decision to the player and the public (if player chooses to make it public) Can't just say "fuck this guy, I think he's trying to scam us" and expect to maintain a reputation.
Have you tried to double-spend?
If yes and there are proves, everything seems legit (except you)
Does your comment reflect how BetBTC would handle a similar situation?