Topic: Discussion about RitzGrandCasino (Read 2383 times)

Well you could say Charles Ponzi didn't con anyone because they invested of their own free will. And he's claiming his casino to be provably fair. Others have alleged that this has not been proved.

 i think ritz is legit its not like he is saying his casino is anything it isnt. the people playing there are there under their own free will. no one elses. and he paid me for nearly all of my posts but some may not have been constructive and some of them were last minute so rolled over to next month

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

Exactly. Even if he intends to be legit he's going about it the wrong way. He's not very smart if you read his posts and look at his behaviour though.

Why is he deleting anything that is even remotely critical if his operation is legit as he is saying?

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.  From my personal messages:

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 ..! 

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.

I don't want to be biased, but I think when they started their signature campaign few members here went harsh on them..! and later ended up being a part of the campaign..! We'll see what happens on 1st april.. I'll not say anything which is not in my hands. 

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.

even if it is with free credits ,  Best of luck and have success if you made up your mind to pay in ..! and I think The problem b/w rbgkey and RGC is personal, they both said some nasty things to each other..! i'll not judge anyone of them on the basis of what they say about each other..! :p no offense to anyone but I think this thread is more about taking out  frustration on RGC's success . that's my opinion and I don't expect anyone to agree ...!

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 

i think all games at the casino have a house edge may be small but all always have house edge.

I don't know how to tell if a sight is provably fair so I try to play games like I would at the casino.  Games that have very low to no house edge.   

Well it's honest of them to remove it, but why wouldn't they just make themselves provably fair instead?

Well I'm so sad , I didn't got any good feedback or negative feedback (dont tag me red! xD) joking..
About the provably fair things, yeah some sites says they 're but they aren't at all.
like coinbet who has removed the provably fair logo since.

Read mine. For some reason RitzGrandCasino left me negative after I posted this: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5473608 haha. Never even said anything bad or negative about them prior to him leaving me feedback.

Look at my feedback page if you want a laugh. Even got bad feedback because apparently I moved someone's thread to off topic, and he never even tried to talk to me about it.

Have they proved that they are provably fair? There should not be criticism if they have.

How do you even prove it being provably fair?

In the end gamblers go there based on reputation. If they are not playing correctly they will be spooked and leave.

No, I see your point, but the feedback is unmoderated and anyone can leave any crap, so it largely doesn't matter. The feedback is essentially worthless from those not on the trusted list. If some whiny bitch wants to leave you negative feedback then there's nothing you can do about it, so I wouldn't let it get to you.

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.

I've seen several complaints along these lines, and looked back through the last 20 pages and only found 3 threads created by him, is there more I'm missing or what? I mean locking an old thread to make a new one is okay, as long as it isn't excessive. I think people are just getting confused because he deletes the old bump and reposts it, which is okay (and encouraged, do you really want to read 10 replies in a row of BUMP?) as long as it isn't an early bump (24 hours).


Yeah, I'm not going to stop someone from making a thread about his website just because you make one, don't be ridiculous.

Feedback doesn't really matter if they're not on the trusted list. People will likely just ignore feedback if it's left for silly things and isn't sourced.

I could care less if one negative feedback means an hour of gay sex with a transsexual midget. It's an internet forum and you guys are getting all butthurt over who runs what sort of Ponzi or casino site. If that's your biggest worry in life, it's time to leave mom's basement.

It's now being abused by people particularly those who threaten to leave negative trust because (not because of a bad trade, not because of a scam) but because they spammed something. I'm quite sure that it wasn't created for spam, that's what a report to moderator function is for. Maybe tomorrow someone will decide I'll leave a negative trust because I don't like this guy's grammar and punctuation.

This is why I think the majority of these anti-gambling campaigners are morons. They cry, spam, cry some more and spam some more and then when they can't get their own way they leave bad trust feedback.

Fucking morons.

One negative feedback left doesn't equal one point.

I see -6 which means others have realized he's a loser with too much time on his hands. Countless hours arguing over casinos and Ponzi's... must look good on a resume. Yay!!!!

Hurrrrrr Durrrrrrr.

He's a nice neutral Trust: of 0: -0 / +0(0) to everybody else. Love it when people think leaving feedback for people effects their score.

Hmm that really is a lot of Negative Trust exchange between you guys..! btw why bashing one casino..! they all are not probably fair even if they claim to be so.! c'mon man we are talking about gambling here If you want to gamble you must do it with the money you don't give a F about..! like if you have 100$ then i'll suggest to gamble only 1-5$ so that even if you loose it doesn't make any huge impact..!

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5901042

http://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/gh-contact_us/complaints/how_do_i_complain_about_a_gamb.aspx

Trust is individual, you see me with -6 trust because you gave me negative reputation, which I find is funny.


Abuse of the trust system much? I see you as -6 trust also.

Thread started by a guy with -6 trust seems legit.

They cant proove they are provably fair, meaning they shouldnt advertise that. Look at that you have ritz under your sig, hmmm seem like money buys people, lol

I am not saying that it is rigged, and get this through your thick skull. They claim to be provably fair, but they are not. They don't need to not pay winners to be a scam. They can make results more in the house's favor, and selectively target players.

Do you think I would go on this big of a rant and then go gamble there? No thanks, i'd rather throw money at newbie beggars, at least it'd be going to people that want it.

What's with this crusade you lost a lot of money there?  If you did.. Just get drunk or get in a fight helps clear the system 

I read your thread on the scam accusation forum (only OP, not all of it) and did not see any evidence of scam.
You can not say that they scam people, if you do not show that the website is rigged, or not paying winning players.

Bump.

I'm taking note, thanks

Done.

I've seen almost daily new threads or bumps from this guy. Or the threads appear new because they are self moderated and he removes all comments? I think this guy should be suspended from posting for a while and we create a general thread about the site that is not self moderated.

Can you please update the title of this thread to something like "Official Discussion about Ritz Grand Casino" and we make this thread stay instead of all the new ones he is posting and bumping? Otherwise I will try to create an "official discussion" of this casino so that he's not allowed to create more threads.

He has created many threads and bumped them. And he removes all criticism of this since it's self moderated... It would be best if we report his new threads as soon as possible and possible create one open general thread that is not self moderated.

He create a thread,  lock it,  and create a new one.  Two threads on the same page..

They're not, but they made another after I posted in one that wasn't self moderated.

why are they allowed to make multiple thread for 1 casino?  Forum rules say 1 per site.

Please read the childish comments they made and allegations against them in this thread

Also read the official scam accusation thread here

I made this thread in the gambling section because they continue to make self moderated threads, and you are instructed to create a seperate thread. Also, not many people read the scam acxusation forum.

They made a non- self moderated thread in this subforum a few minutes ago, I posted links to the same threads and they immediately locked it.

Mods, please notify me if there is a problem.


Edit: I just got a lovely email from them