Pages:
Author

Topic: BitBet Stole ~$7,000 from me (10 BTC) - page 12. (Read 58195 times)

full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
November 21, 2013, 07:07:13 PM
The only court which might have had any authority here would have been the Rota. Unfortunately, that died.
Woof?! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Rota?

Corrected for you, running dog. As previously stated I'm only here for my own entertainment. There's no money in it for me
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 522
November 21, 2013, 07:00:54 PM
Hopefully, they will spread the word that BitBet is a scam site run by thieves.
Which is false, but I understand guess blackmail is OK with you.
What you should know is that you're far from the first wanting to do that. What do you think would happen if any company catered towards any of those requests?

You do realize no one was able to provide a valid argument which makes bitbet's policy a legit reason for keeping those btc, right? So far in the whole post every time it was questioned all the answers where insults. I hope you can clarify from a technical point of view why this is valid.

The BitBet policy needs no "legit reason". It IS the policy. That's it, what BitBet says is what is. No "legit"-ing around by unrelated parties on forums can change what the policy is.

Re-read my posts in this thread and copy them by hand on your notebook. They're not optional for you, they're mandatory.

You do realize that not agreeing with someone's policy is not enough to build a court case?
The policy is there, if you don't agree don't use the site. But if you call it "theft", you're a scammer.
I don't think you understand how policies work in court.  A court would never uphold a policy that states "I have the right to steal your money," which is effectivly what bitbet's policy says.


The only court which might have had any authority here would have been the Rota. Unfortunately, that died. So whatever, GLWT.

Quote
5.1. This contract is the sole and complete agreement between the parties. It may not be modified by third parties, irrespective if said parties should style themselves "court of law", "judge" or otherwise.

From, you know, the contract.
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
November 21, 2013, 06:54:38 PM
You're an admitted paid shill. wipe that shit off your lips.
...and as expected, a reply void of any arguments. Checkmate!

I doubt you even understand checkers let alone chess. It's checkmate when I have no more moves.

This is way above your pay grade shitface.

When's your girlfriend back anyway?

So much butthurt.
Now you understand why I'd pay just to read this thread Smiley

I don't have a dog in this race, unlike you bitchboy. I'm here purely because I want to be not because I was paid. My butt is absolutely fine. If it was hurting I'm sure I could pay a shill like you 0.00001bitcoin to kiss it better.

Is there anything you won't do for bitcoin dust? Do you consider yourself a rent-boy or do you have a different name for it? Genuine question.
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
November 21, 2013, 06:41:12 PM
You're an admitted paid shill. wipe that shit off your lips.
...and as expected, a reply void of any arguments. Checkmate!

I doubt you even understand checkers let alone chess. It's checkmate when I have no more moves.

This is way above your pay grade shitface.

When's your girlfriend back anyway?
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
November 21, 2013, 06:35:13 PM
Your own sig admits you are a paid shill.
First, read it. None of the work is going under the username "pankkake".
Second, try to make your brain work. Would I advertise it on the very account I would do it, if I was paid to? Would I advertise it if I thought it would harm my credibility in any way? Perhaps you're not as clever as you think you are.
Third, if I was paid, how does that invalidate anything? MPOE-PR is paid, for example, does that mean she is wrong?
Fourth, explain this.

Quote
I wonder how much you got paid for this thread. I doubt you even got a whole bitcoin. You're the bottom feeder that other bottom feeders shit on.
Zero, and I lost on that bet!

Quote
I doubt you even got a whole bitcoin. You're the bottom feeder that other bottom feeders shit on.
Given the amount of time I spent on this thread, I certainly would not make anyone pay one bitcoin, I'd consider 0.1 BTC to be a very good tip.
Given how much I loled, I'd pay to read this thread.
TL;DR Learn to ad hominem.

You're an admitted paid shill. Wipe that shit off your lips. I've no interest in reading your thread as it's written by you and you're posting for bitcoin and will post whatever you are paid to post.

Oh we're supposed to expect a WEAK character like you will only expect money to post in your comedy alt not in your serious, honest pankkake account; yet here you are an apologist shill.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
November 21, 2013, 06:27:13 PM
If you don't want people to bet right before the bet ends, then simply reduce the potential winnings gradually right near the end.
This is already the case, which shows you still haven't read the FAQ.  Shocked
Then why is there any worry about last-minute bidders "scamming" other people at all?
It's about betting after the result is known.
You really read nothing, did you? Perhaps do that before taking a side.
If the result of a bet becomes known prior to the bet deadline, then no further bets should be taken.  People can be free to send more money in, but they would get exactly 0% of the winnings, only having their money refunded.

How is this a hard thing for people to figure out?  I don't get it.
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
November 21, 2013, 06:19:24 PM
If you don't want people to bet right before the bet ends, then simply reduce the potential winnings gradually right near the end.
This is already the case, which shows you still haven't read the FAQ.  Shocked
Then why is there any worry about last-minute bidders "scamming" other people at all?
It's about betting after the result is known.
You really read nothing, did you? Perhaps do that before taking a side.
Your own sig admits you are a paid shill.

"Hire me" https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/hire-a-troll-quality-copywriter-240677

I wonder how much you got paid for this thread. I doubt you even got a whole bitcoin. You're the bottom feeder that other bottom feeders shit on.
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
November 21, 2013, 06:02:19 PM
If you don't want people to bet right before the bet ends, then simply reduce the potential winnings gradually right near the end.
This is already the case, which shows you still haven't read the FAQ.  Shocked
Then why is there any worry about last-minute bidders "scamming" other people at all?

We're dealing with mid-intelligence criminals here. MP pays them "dividends" from people she's ripped off and then they slap each other on the back. Circlejerks like that seldom make sense.

All MP's 'businesses' would be in the red if they had to stop stealing. S/he managed to run a company in the real world for how long before going bust? And how many tens of dollars did he/she make in those years?

I used to know a few criminals back in the day and the attitude of MP reminds me of them. They used to say stuff like "Someone leaving a window open deserve to be robbed - the idiots!" or "What did the stupid bitch expect leaving her handbag on the floor?"

Absolutely no difference between those crims and bitbet. The thing about both groups is they prey on people being trusting. They think someone trusting someone else is a fool. I expect MP was abandoned as a child and this is how s/he gets back at the world. Fuck all these criminals. All they ever get is a very short term gain then a life full of misery.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
November 21, 2013, 05:47:15 PM
If you don't want people to bet right before the bet ends, then simply reduce the potential winnings gradually right near the end.
This is already the case, which shows you still haven't read the FAQ.  Shocked
Then why is there any worry about last-minute bidders "scamming" other people at all?
sr. member
Activity: 342
Merit: 250
November 21, 2013, 05:35:34 PM
Apparently it won't be, since some people here seem to think stealing from its users is a commendable practice.

Seriously, how would you handle the case "someone sends an unconfirmed TX right before the bet ends, TX confirms after the bet has been decided" ?

Refund?
You want to discourage scammers, not have to guess every time whether the request is legitimate or not.

Yes, refund minus some fee for the inconvenience. I don't see how it's scamming if the bet is at all in question when the transaction was made. If the price is at $749, is it a scam to bet that it will hit $750? What about $740? $700?

It's very simple as I see it, don't count bets that confirm after the bet is over. That way nobody can cheat the system. If someone tries to make a late bet and the transaction doesn't confirm, return the money minus a small fee. That money is not yours to keep, it's not yours at all. And in situations like the one OP bet in, price can move VERY fast and confirmations can take 30 minutes+ even with a generous fee sometimes. In fact I was watching the price that day and I wouldn't be surprised if the price on the exchanges went from ~$700 or so to $750 in a matter of minutes.
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
November 21, 2013, 05:27:44 PM
You should at least report the domain name for fake details.

http://www.whois.us/whoiscompliance/ComplaintMain.jsp I suggest you report both PoliMedia.us and bitbet.us

Then we can find out who's really behind this scam. As far as I can see they are some failed company  Norsena aka "Polimedia"[1] that's currently in Forfeited Existence[2] in texas. There's no privacy in .us domains. Let's see how soon the site changes domain name lol. polimedia.us points to that joke exchange that also takes most revenue .

Registrant Name: MARTHA MCCULLER
Registrant Organization: NORSENA
Registrant Street: 14781 MEMORIAL DR.
Registrant Street: APT 2454
Registrant City: HOUSTON
Registrant State/Province: TX - See more at: http://www.enom.com/whois/default.aspx?DomainName=PoliMedia.us#sthash.MFi6lY2k.dpuf

Here's the Norsena Co. details
http://www.wysk.com/index/texas/austin/8xt3ltu/norsena-inc/profile
Tax Forfeiture 02/08/2013 02/09/2013

bitbet.us make almost half their income from people like the op. The "Shareholders" aka apologists/paid shills on this thread should consider that and remember that being part of this fraud makes you a co-conspirator.

[1] http://www.enom.com/whois/default.aspx?DomainName=PoliMedia.us
[2] http://direct.sos.state.tx.us/help/help-corp.asp?pg=ov
legendary
Activity: 2072
Merit: 1001
November 21, 2013, 05:05:42 PM
If you don't want people to bet right before the bet ends, then simply reduce the potential winnings gradually right near the end.
This is already the case, which shows you still haven't read the FAQ.  Shocked

I am reading the FAQ and if the website is coded this poorly I am amazed anyone in their right mind would use it.

"What if I created a bet address but can't bet right now?

Once you enter a receiving address and are given a send-to address, you have 3 days (72 hours) to send your bet. If your bet does not make it within 72 hours then that address will be reclaimed. BitBet will be unable to send you your BTC back, as they will have probably been allocated to someone else's bet! Always make sure that you send your first bet on a created address within 3 days of its creation. "
legendary
Activity: 2072
Merit: 1001
November 21, 2013, 04:53:30 PM
The operator of bitbet should return the coins and stop treating the FAQ as an excuse to take other people's property.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
November 21, 2013, 04:47:13 PM
Apparently it won't be, since some people here seem to think stealing from its users is a commendable practice.

Seriously, how would you handle the case "someone sends an unconfirmed TX right before the bet ends, TX confirms after the bet has been decided" ?

Refund?
You want to discourage scammers, not have to guess every time whether the request is legitimate or not.
Refund.

If you don't want people to bet right before the bet ends, then simply reduce the potential winnings gradually right near the end.  For example, if they bet 10 minutes before the bet ends, only give them 10% of the winnings they would have had if they had bet 100 minutes before the bet ends, and spread the other 90% across to the other winners.  If it's 25 minutes beforehand, give them 25% of the winnings.  Etc, etc.  But if they lose the bet, they lose 100% of their bet.

It's not complicated, and you avoid stealing people's money without good reason.

Again I ask, what is your affiliation with this site?
sr. member
Activity: 394
Merit: 250
November 21, 2013, 04:37:47 PM
Apparently it won't be, since some people here seem to think stealing from its users is a commendable practice.

Seriously, how would you handle the case "someone sends an unconfirmed TX right before the bet ends, TX confirms after the bet has been decided" ?

Refund?
You want to discourage scammers, not have to guess every time whether the request is legitimate or not.

Just add a reasonable fee for this kind of refund, it is more than enough to keep scammers away. Charge, let's say, 5% of the amount received. There is also the case "someone sends a transaction not so right before the bet ends, TX confirms after the bet has been decided", refund at 5% fee, too, obviously.

I can't even start to understand why you think this is not the proper way, and stealing is the correct choice. MP really got a legion of fans.

The underlying theme of any MP-affiliated business is that the rules will be set up to protect that business's bitcoins at all costs, despite their user-unfriendliness. The unfortunate fact is that even though its very unlikely that OP was trying to scam, bitcoinland is full of people that can and do scam any service or person that has an exploitable weakness. The level of fraud among bitcoin users is tremendous, much higher than any other consumer financial environment. Hence, rules that seem reasonable based on real-world experience where perhaps 2% of transactions are attempted fraud leave bitcoin businesses too exposed, as this is an environment where perhaps 20-50% of transactions are attempted fraud.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
nearly dead
November 21, 2013, 04:26:30 PM
Apparently it won't be, since some people here seem to think stealing from its users is a commendable practice.

Seriously, how would you handle the case "someone sends an unconfirmed TX right before the bet ends, TX confirms after the bet has been decided" ?

Refund?
You want to discourage scammers, not have to guess every time whether the request is legitimate or not.

Just add a reasonable fee for this kind of refund, it is more than enough to keep scammers away. Charge, let's say, 5% of the amount received. There is also the case "someone sends a transaction not so right before the bet ends, TX confirms after the bet has been decided", refund at 5% fee, too, obviously.

I can't even start to understand why you think this is not the proper way, and stealing is the correct choice. MP really got a legion of fans.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1008
1davout
November 21, 2013, 04:24:58 PM
and if the user actually made an honest mistake then the site is actually scamming the user

Your reasoning flaw is here, the site can not, and should not have to guess whether the request is legitimate or if a scammer is trying to get a refund on an attempted cheat.
It makes perfect sense from a business perspective to take a very clear position should this kind of stuff arise.

legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1008
1davout
November 21, 2013, 04:20:58 PM
Apparently it won't be, since some people here seem to think stealing from its users is a commendable practice.

Seriously, how would you handle the case "someone sends an unconfirmed TX right before the bet ends, TX confirms after the bet has been decided" ?

Refund?
You want to discourage scammers, not have to guess every time whether the request is legitimate or not.
sr. member
Activity: 251
Merit: 250
November 21, 2013, 04:14:06 PM

A bet can either be accepted or rejected, how is it a legit action to accept and reject it at the same time?

Because betting late is scamming legit users.  When a user DECIDE to bet late they RISK their BTC by betting late and essentially scamming the system when a bet resolution is clear.  (screwing those who bet early with no knowledge of the bet outcome). 

This policy was instituted because legit users were getting squeezed out of their winnings because of people like snackman.  Bitbet.us took a hardline stance and publicly stated so.  Should they spam each bettor with the FAQ before placing a bet?  I dunno, I am not involved in any way (besides a user).

You can bet all day on bitbet.us safely.    If you bet close to the closing date then you are taking EXTRA risk which is an EXTRA service rendered in terms of gambling. 

Snackman's inability to:


1.  Use bitcoin-qt or legit web-wallet to even receive a refund, IF BITBET wanted to.   There is no way to refund as he did not do this.  FAIL 1.

2.  Read the FAQ    FAIL 2.

3.  Send a small amount first  FAIL 3.

4.  Admit his mistake of not reading the FAQ, accept his part in it, and request a refund based on his newbie dumb-ass status.  Would this have worked to get a refund?  We will never know now, will we?   FAIL 4.

Running around fucking up based on assumptions of how a gambling site should behave is no way to keep your BTC. 

It is, indeed, time to grow up.  Is it time for Bitbet.us to change that policy?  I don't know, but none of you have any fucking say in it.  Lots of big players use BitBet correctly and safely, and the loss of users like snackman is actually a boon to the business.  So, keep it up!




I understand your point, but rejecting the bet because of being late protects the user in the same way than this policy, doesn't it?

Also, if you find a bet you find interesting, but you have your btc on a site, is it such a crime to try to get in if you think the bet is still valid? Wouldn't you assume if you are too late that it will be refunded to you if the place is legit? One can probably think that he will be really late if he transfers the btc to his wallet and then to the site.

And he has no way on proving that he owns such address, but the support from the other site could easily state that he actually owns or not said address, probably they will be more eager to help given that they are the ones that sent the transaction without fees. Wouldn't that be sufficient to entitle him for a refund?



Yes, I would be fine with either policy.   This is because I would never send anything to any site (much less $9,000) without reading the fine print.  I don't sweat policies because I read them.

If I find a bet interesting, being a reasonable person, I would send from my blockchain.info hot wallet which contains very little BTC.  Again, because I read the fine print and already know that shitty wallets can't get refunds -- because I ask questions when there is a gray area. 

I would also look at the closing date and make sure I'm in at least a few days securely before bet closing, or I would not bet.  So, no, I wouldn't assume anything, I have made such mistakes in the past and learned from them.

BetsOfBitcoin could not verify identity at all, afaik.  How could they?



Thats the thing, some people take precautions, some not; some use protection, some end up with unexpected kids Tongue

Or more seriously, some people are adverse to risks, some love them...

Well when I said that of BoB I'm assuming that someone that runs the site has access to all the private keys of all the address and the database that states which address belongs to which user; and that such person is willing to do all the verification and sign a message with the involved address stating it belongs to person x and that it should be refunded to address z. Other than lack of willingness I don't see why it couldn't be done.
My guess because bets are anonymous.  I haven't checked in a year or so but last time I was there you send to a BTC address and if you won, it was sent back.  Never did I need to put in a piece of identifiable information.

I just checked, now you need a login.  They could *probably* do this if they were so inclined.  I'm just trying to figure out why they should when snackman was trying to scam all the legit bettors out of their winnings?

Thats the thing, how you know he was trying to scam the other bettors of their winnings and not trying to place a legit bet? Its a very thin line. I haven't actually check what he bet and at what time, but if the bet was still open at the time he initiated the transfer I don't see how he was doing this; and even if he did initiated the bet late, how do you know he was actually trying to scam and not making an honest mistake?

A good policy will only affect the scammers and not the honest people as well. From what I read here I have a very reasonable doubt he was actually trying to scam the bettors. If someone here can explain with details how he was trying to achieve this I might change my mind, but the system already rejects late bets, how is it that this late bet is different than the others? This is actually the fishy point that keeps bugging me.

Don't get me wrong, I never bet on the betting sites, mainly because I'm too paranoid and most of them look like they where not professionally done. I'm adverse to risks and I think that I'm not only risking in loosing the bet but in being scammed as well. Anyone could actually put up a decently looking betting site and wait for the fish to bet and take their money. I never actually checked them but I saw some fishy sites every now and then posted in the forum. If snackman was actually trying to scam the bettors I think it is bitbet's duty to show irrefutable proof of this; not only because it the right thing to do, but because I'm pretty sure it will affect their reputation if they don't. Right now if you google bitbet scam you will find 61600 results, which 3240 are posts from this forum. At the moment the amount of people adopting btc are comparable to the amount of people buying iphones (keiser's report), if this site wants to capture the emerging market, it should have clear, just and user friendly policies. I'm pretty sure there are a lot of newbie mistakes to be made on a lot of sites related to btc, and if the user actually made an honest mistake then the site is actually scamming the user. Investors of this site should actually be more worried about the site reputation than the measly 10 btc divided threw all of them. I don't actually get how come the support haven't tried to clear this up yet, my only clue is badly paid third party support...

This is at least my point of view, anyone is free to correct me if I'm wrong or to show proof the snackman was indeed trying to scam the rest of the bettors.

legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
November 21, 2013, 03:58:52 PM
This is apparently not the first, or even the second time, that BitBet has scammed its users.

Hopefully it's the last.
Apparently it won't be, since some people here seem to think stealing from its users is a commendable practice.
Pages:
Jump to: