Topic: ❃❃ ▶▷ BETCOIN.ag ◁◀ ❃❃#Signature Campaign-High Pay, Monthly Bonus, Special Award - page 9. (Read 151880 times)

You seem like a reasonable person, so I hope we can discuss this reasonably.  It seems like you have issues with other people who feel the same way that I do, but I hope that you don't transfer those feelings onto me, just as I won't transfer how I feel about Betcoin on to you.

Deal?

Also, I've been playing poker professionally for a very long time, so I assure you you don't have to link any reference material to me.  It's why I feel so strongly about Betcoin shaping up...I know what it does to the game to have dishonesty and shadiness.
 
If you know what 'multi-accounting' means, and you're accusing Twitchy of multi accounting when you know that the reason he created all of those accounts was to chat with support and chat in the public chat box, you are being dishonest with your accusation.  Because you know that he did not do what you are accusing him of doing.  It's like knowing that someone got banned from a store for cursing out the owner and then telling everyone "Well you get banned from stores for stealing, and that guy got banned from the store so he MUST have stolen a bunch of stuff!"  That's wrong, and amusingly enough that's literally libel (which is a word that I've seen Betcoin and Betcoin employees throw around on this forum often, always incorrectly).  Again, I only know what he's told me and what I've seen with my eyes.  If you have proof that he used multiple accounts to play in the same tournament or cash game, that's a whole different story.  But nobody has ever accused him of doing so, even Betcoin who has a history of doxxing their users.

Now my question...did Betcoin Jessica/Jessica White encourage/ask you to/pay you to/reward you for leaving Twitchy negative feedback?  Would you be willing to show a screenshot of your cashier/recent activity tab on Betcoin to prove that you did not in fact get paid/rewarded for doing so?

I don't understand why you have to resort to ad-hominem attacks against Twitchy to reinforce your crumbling arguments for still supporting Twitchy. The source doesn't matter if there's evidence there, which there is. The past entire page was just all about Twitchy's credibility which is completely irrelevant. Multiple accounts and all that garbage is what you've been stuck on, and what of it? How does that refute the evidence against Betcoin?

Betcoin's entire history of ignorance and pushing away discussion relating to anything negative about them should definitely set off some alarms.

There's been 1 feedback that has been removed. You never had -32 on default settings, that's what custom settings made it look.
1 less negative feedback makes the difference between -16 and -8, don't talk like that's been a huge improvement, when it isn't.
Read about how the trust system works before writing bullshit.

You're overvaluing my connection to crypto-games.net, and I don't think Blazr is connected to any onling gambling service.
As for dooglus, well, they are trusted besides their involvement with just-dice, I think they can very well distinguish between that and their activity on DT.

First off, I don't threaten, I (publicly) said I would strongly consider it. It's more of an informative post than a threat.
I had contacted Blazed prior to this, as I thought I should inform them about my future actions, aswell as I had discussed them with several others, RHavar for example.
As for staff, they will hardly interfer here, feel free to prove me wrong. Or are we talking about staff like Lauda, who ditched you the second they saw your actions?

I didn't leave positive trust th TwitchySeal, that's one more of your lies. Get your posts straight (no pun intended), or don't post at all. Bullshit.

They're probably wrong to do so.

Hahaha, good one. You should try standup comedy.

"Some people are dumb enough to still play on BetSoft games and we continue to offer those to them, even though BetSoft was the company we blamed for scamming Jason Ort"
FTFY.

Don't confuse warning with threatening. A fair warning before leaving negative trust to others should be taken over suddenly negging everyone in a campaign any given day.
Once again, this was no threat, you shouldn't twist it to the point where it supports your point, even though you have a history of twisting words and situations.

You continue to offer BetSoft games, don't talk about a great place to play. Get your shit together and ditch them.
Also you continue to ignore questions which answers would make you look bad, or how about answering those questions by Jason Ort?

Example of Betcoin catching multi-accounters, letting them keep part of the funds they won by cheating other players and using the rest in a promotion.  Allowing original cheaters to participate in promotion.  Then lying about it.

Do you understand all that?  I've got plenty more examples by the way, this is just one small simple one.

Feb 8th:




A few weeks later:



Several months later:

So are you saying that if Betcoin is willing to edit out the "most trusted" sentence from the signature, you will be OK with that? Your battle will be won and no more accusations will be put against its signature participants, am I right?

Maybe it's a some kind of temporary solution.

That was to show that I was directly involved in a game that included an admitted multi-accounter who was rightfully banned, in reference to the validity of my claim that I was affected personally.  Multiple accounts on poker sites should not be allowed because it affects the integrity of the game.

Then what was the point of this?  Did you feel cheated by me?  Why didn't they ban me then? 

I showed no interest before because I reviewed all the evidence and interpreted it all as the rantings of a determined disgruntled player....which happens.  However, once I was threatened to be provided negative trust if I did not remove the signature by the following month, it became personal and I had to provide my interpretation of the events in my own defense.  Now, multi-accounting, whether it be a sock puppet, a shill, or a cheat is dishonest because it distorts the truth....so....??   I have never felt cheated by Betcoin and I have been playing there for a few years....I know what the evidence is because I've been a regular player there, and these other casino operators, who don't play at Betcoin, who have little or no experience with the platform, who then come in here and threaten me with negative trust if I don't remove the signature, are misinformed at best and untrustworthy at worst.

I'm done for the night....I will think more on the subject when I'm rested and calmer.

^^^This garbage, OK. You seem a little confused on the facts here, cjm. I know of no other site twitchyseal has been banned from other than Betcoin. His bans certainly have not been for multiaccounting. The latest ban is the result of a poorly chosen, but simple, troll towards a moderator, nothing more.

When he was banned, it was not for cheating, there was no poker involved, no money was won or lost.

As for your lack of understanding concerning multiaccounting at Betcoin, up until a few months ago, Betcoin allowed multiaccounting, and for people to admit to doing so in the main chat. Yes, of course twitchy has made a bunch of accounts, he doesn't deny this. The accounts are for chat only.

You're turning this into something it isn't, something that you know that it isn't, in an attempt to do what exactly? Push someone else's agenda you had no interest in until now?

Is this still available?

I don't have issues with people who promote smoking businesses. Or gambling, or guns, or alcohol or drugs.

I do have an issue with people who promote any type of dishonest business by helping them fool people into thinking they are honest.

If that guy was wearing a Malboro ad that said "Malboro, The cigarette that won't give you cancer" that would be a problem.

If you're wearing a Betcoin signature, you are responsible for helping a dishonest business fool people into thinking they are honest.  That's what they are paying you for.  To convince others that Betcoin is "the most trusted Bitcoin and Litecoin Casino"

And, I stand by my claims.  If you look at your previous posts in this thread you will see where you admitted to multi-accounting....And, the trust I left you was in reference to the trust you left me for wearing Betcoin's signature....You have an ax to grind with Betcoin, not me.  And, I simply stated what I believe to be the truth as to your motivation for leaving me negative trust for not finding your evidence credible.

No I didn't.



Actually, let me remind you of what you've said so far.



You've called me mentally ill.

You've called Lutpin a "trust farming, trust abusing, shilling little punk"

You've attacked the  site Lutpin is campaign manager of. (I think thats what he does there, not sure)

Then there's this tantrum:


Followed by this exchange:


Shortly after, you left the following negative feedback for me :

Trust abuser. Long time cheater on the poker scene who has been kicked off of several sites for violating terms and conditions....Had several accounts for which he was caught and banned and is now campaigning in retribution for the punishment he received for his dishonest acts. Betcoin.ag was protecting it's players from this cheater by banning him and now he has been manipulating facts to bash on betcoin.


In the end you have not proven ANYTHING except the fact that you are incredibly stubborn and ignorant by choice.

EVIDENCE:


You admitted to multi-accounting.  

Look, this is all I'm saying.  You've been ranting every since you were banned.  However, I've given you the benefit of the doubt and have been keeping up, for the most part, on your claims.  But, this is it....the mistakes that betcoin made they compensated for, the issue with Jason was resolved (albeit...the details are part of a NDA), and the issues with Betsoft is complicated to say the least.  Betcoin contracts out to pretty established sites for their software which are licensed by gaming authorities (albeit: the licensing authorities are in different jurisdictions)....Betsoft is no small provider....their integrity affects a huge portion of the gaming market so their actions will be audited and peer reviewed; dismissing them as fraudulent without audit is not something that should be taken lightly.  As for the claims that Betcoin changed the rules in the description of the game: that was after Jason's claims were being reviewed and the interpretation of the rules were clarified to avoid similar instances from occurring again.  Now, it was already established that Jason had a legitimate claim and it was never argued that those rules were there prior to Jason's win....You, I, casinolistings, Betcoin, and everybody else in chat had seen Jason's argument.  Fixing the terms on the game to clarify the rules was the responsible thing for Betcoin to do after Betsoft appended their terms so that nobody else would face the same problem that confronted Jason in the future....The fact that the date wasn't edited was just an oversite and didn't affect Jason's case which was already recorded and established.

Now, I have not seen ( And I've been playing at Betcoin, quietly, for quite some time) any tangible evidence that Betcoin is purposely trying to scam anybody out of their money; in fact, they are quite generous and have compensated for any mistakes that have been made, unlike other sites.  That's all we can ask: I still haven't been paid from tilt, lock, bulldog, received some comps from UB/AP but not all, and I have been duped by several flyby night bitcoin gambling sites here on this forum <-- my bad.  

But, back to the point.  I trust Betcoin and I would not endorse a site that I did not believe in. I've been around the scene for a long time and I recognize a bad site.  So, to threaten me with negative trust for endorsing a site I believe in without providing credible evidence that they are scamming is insincere.  I have never had a problem with Betcoin and I've been playing with them for a few years....I have never scammed anyone nor cheated anybody out of what was rightfully theirs, and Betcoin has never cheated me. So, at this point, after looking at all the evidence, and in my defense, I am stuck with having to question the credibility and integrity of those making the accusations.  And, if I have to be bullied with negative trust for wearing Betcoin's signature than so be it....I have to stand up for who I believe has the better integrity and that's Betcoin.ag in this case.

So you are probably very happy that Schumacher have had near fatal accident, he was such a money whore, smoking endorsing bitch...
I do realise that what I just did is pure demagogy. But you guys starting to overreact.
Check how many negative feedback is on yobit account. Will you give negatives to all Sig. participants of that exchange to? I dont see any new accusations, same old, long resolved  crap you guys posting, over and over. Is this some kind of personal vendetta?

 

But you have time to fuck with Betcoin's signature right? FUCK YOU!


Its better for you to FUCK OFF from this forum as well since you have not a single knowlege to contribute this forum, you money fucking whore!

Money is what you have joined the forum for. After leaving Betcoin's campaign you will soon start joining another campaign only for money. Because you are such a duck headed pimp that doesn't even know what a "REAL" contribution is as you don't have anything inside your skull except your inconsistent hunt for money.

If I were the moderator here I would have banned the shit out of you all.

And yes you DO ENDORSE smoking if you wear a Marlboro Classic shirt.

That sad part is I'm pretty sure cjmoles is the most informed member of this campaign.  The only one that gives a fuck about anything other than the monthly payment and actually plays on Betcoin with some regularity.  

It's pathetic what you've resorted to, I hope you wake up and realize the reason you've resorted to spreading this BS in hopes to discredit me is only because you have no legitimate argument to defend Betcoins actions.

---

Also to add to cjmoles previous statement on how a site should deal with cheaters, here's an excerpt from the unaddressed scam accusation against Betcoin.ag  (click the links for evidence )

• Dealing with Cheaters
  When cheaters are caught colluding or multi-accounting they are permitted to continue playing on the site.  They have admitted to using confiscated funds for various things other than refunding victims.
  
  
• They ran a 10 bitcoin "no collusion" freeroll (See announcement HERE), inspired by a group of recent cashgame colluders.  They ended up ALLOWING THE CHEATERS TO PLAY IN THE FREEROLL  (Betcoin Jessica later lied about this)
  
  
• When they found out a player was DoS attacking another player with the intent to extort them, they suggested he apologize and then ignored the issue. Betcoin thread with all the details:[LINK]   Screen shot of Support ticket:[LINK]
   

You always go around the corner. This is not ping-pong therefore I do not wish to reply you because you are clearly not listening.
You and I have nothing to do together. I go my way you go yours.
That's it

If marlboro pays you to advertise for them, and you do, THEN YES.


So yeah, multi-accounting is serious.  You've accused me of it, I've denied it, and then you said you didn't have time to provide any evidence.

In the mean time you've acted as if the piles of evidence I've presented proving Betcoin has been lying simply does not exist.

I provide evidence.

You provide excuses.

True.  Multi-accounting has ruined lucrative careers....Look up the stoxtrader (Nick Grudzian)/Leatherass (Dusty Schmitt) incident.  It's very serious.  Dusty wasn't even directly involved, yet his career took a huge hit.  Having multiple accounts on a single poker site is against a poker sites terms and conditions, regardless if the bad actor admits to collusion, short stacking, rat-holing, softplay, or multiple entry because it is hard to prove intent.  It was sufficient enough to ruin Dusty's career that multiple accounts were established, even though he wasn't proven to be the culprit; Nick was the Culprit.  

It is the responsibility of the site operator to ban multiple accounts to protect the integrity of the game.

This will lead you to the consensus in the poker community on the practice of multi-accounting:   http://www.internettexasholdem.com/poker-forum/general-board/nick-quotstoxtraderquot-grudzian-resigns-over-cheating-61589.html  There's also a link to the 2plus2 thread that detailed the incident.