Topic: Discussion about RitzGrandCasino (Read 2383 times)

Did they pay you for every post? Have they paid everybody in the deal? I still think you're foolish and greedy for even taking the chance given his behaviour, but I'm glad it paid out for you. Scepticism is healthy thing to have round here, and if you don't have it it's only a matter of time until you're scammed. We'll see how long you'll be singing Ritz' praises for though.

So now I have enough substance to back my claim that they are not what you called them "scammers" and paid for for there signature campaign that you were quite optimistic about.. !   and now you'll say even if they paid you they are " blah blah "
https://blockchain.info/tx/4d4c12f11bbecf48ccd88f3a16424b5e9433515059a712afa2fd4cec623c659e

Then don't argue until you have. There's nothing that hasn't already been said anyway so people just may as well wait till he proves himself either provably fair or pays out for sigs which isn't long now.

Look Hilarious I don't want to argue about something which I can't backup with enough substance ..!  

Yep, he'll delete anything that is even remotely critical.

Just wanted to confirm that the casino folks seem to be deleting any post with even the most tiny shred of criticism.

well i got the 0.02 "credits" for creating the account but it doesn't look like that's even enough to try out a game.

the 'hello220' promotion was pretty lame, they wanted me to deposit 0.02BTC in order to get any bonus, and then that bonus has to be x11 in order to withdrawl.  oh well.

By "harsh" I think you mean making reasonable requests to prove legitimacy? The burden of proof is on the casino owners. The last two deals offering more than Stunna scammed everyone of their users by not paying a bitcent out. He actually created the tension himself by acting like a child, deleting reasonable requests and leaving unjust negative feedback.

What success? Successfully acting like a child? Ritz has acted childishly and shadily from the start. I doubt this thread would even be here if he acted more professional. I also hope you're not eating your words on the 1st.

i am getting confuse on rbgkey
i mean what's with all the hate bro?
anyway i will try to play on their casino when i get back to my laptop and tell you all guys the result
i will use his free credit 

You are missing the point.

I acquired my first negative feedback because of nothing to do with trading or scamming people. It was because someone didn't like that I 'defended' Ponzi site operators. In actual fact I have a very long and lengthy article pinned to the Gambling page to caution people about scams. At the same time, I'm open to the idea that some Ponzi sites can exist that reward everyone as long as the players are all aware how the game works. If all donators know how the money pays out, and agree that it is okay, it's not a scam. A scam is when the new money is unaware of the idea they are paying the old money.

So because I chose to allow people to read the facts and decide on their own, I must be pro-Ponzi and must be a scammer.

Then we have the same moron threatening to leave negative trust because of people who are spamming the same content.

It's disturbing when someone takes it upon themselves to target your trust based on the fact you don't agree with them and then because you are spamming (which wasn't me by the way). What if tomorrow I decided I wanted to target people who were pro-casinos and said they encouraged scamming. Then I went and flooded every casino thread with large big red 'SCAM' letters.

OF course logic like this falls on deaf ears. Because I am not a sheeple and because I believe investors can make their own decisions I must be labeled as untrustable.

So I disagree... feedback DOES matter to me, in the sense that it's being misused as a weapon.