Topic: For the reputation of this forum: you HAVE to rule on this flag! Share 10mBTC - page 2. (Read 1228 times)

You can lock, delete, or move this thread to the archive section all by your self.  You don't a moderator to do it.



Oh FFS, would you make up your mind.  No one here is that desperate for your 1mBTC, blessed or cursed.  Personally, I'm tempted to oppose your flag just to see if you'll honor your word (and your curse,) because I think you're full of shit on both accounts.



What are you talking about?  There's no revoking your right to be jackass after it's already happened.  This is the interwebs and everything is archived.  You won't be getting any good-boy points for paying up, and you're not losing anything by not.  No one cares.

Hello everyone,
A reminder:

You have until tomorrow 17h UTC to participate! So hurry up!

---

It doesn’t matter you can still contact Cyrus and he’ll do the job. As I said I prefer to revoke my freedom of speech right for the sake of more important things that require merit and the sanity of the trust system. I was also getting negative trust points from some other idiots but looks like they deleted them.

Feedback isn't moderated. You're free to say almost anything you want here, including attacking Admin if you please.

It’s so funny that you are revoking your escrow offer when I have already rejected you.

Again: I do not want to damage a trust score system I am trying to test. If you think so, all you have to do is report it to get erased. That’s all.

Lol. You're a sore loser when you don't get your way. For the record: I withdraw my offer to act as an escrow. Your latest post makes it look like you were hoping to buy Support instead of asking people to freely choose Support or Oppose.

Dear Forum Members,
Only 3 days left to participate! No participants will be accepted after the 30th of May 17h UTC.

On the other hand, the Hero Members here are very good at meriting each other saying this is a spam, and not good for the trust system: in this case, I revoke my rights of freedom of expression for this thread, so please erase it so that I can save 10 mBTC. I have created a provably fair game for some unworthy people, yet I get my trust score diminished and no merit.

Except that I forgot to mention one thing: The 1 mBTC you’ll receive has a curse associated with it for those who oppose it, so even a 99% atheist might want to return it afterwards to the wallet it came from, fees on me up to 0.02 mBTC. The curse is stronger when you lack integrity and less important if you’re stupid,  but in both cases well merited.

Asking users to post their Bitcoin address can lead to low effort spam:
That's only allowed in Games and rounds.
So far, this hasn't happened though.

Really? Low effort spam? You’re suchanidiot.

I also opposed the flag. For one reason, at least, this being the following: once OP used FortuneJack's services, he agreed to their Terms and Conditions. The terms may be incorrect, as LoyceV emphasized, but since OP used the services he also agreed to the respective Terms. Maybe he did not properly read them, but this is irrelevant.

Dura lex, sed lex, Latins used to say - The law is harsh but it is the law. Same thing applies to a contract (or, in this case, FortuneJack's terms). If OP signs a contract with someone, and he agrees to work for that person 8h / day, 40h / week for next 40 years, with no payment for his work, then he has no right to complain afterwords, nor to say that the contract is incorrect towards him, as he previously agreed with contract terms, when he signed it...

That's not what the trust system is for. At best this is low-effort spam, incentivizing which is against the rules when posting on the forum, and I can't think of any reason why such incentive could be good for the trust system either.

terms are still terms. sometimes they seem so stupid, but obviously, it is necessary to emphasize everything. People come up with all sorts of things


I remember your case, and while it was still current, I opposed the flag still then. as far as I remember of my decision, there was only one reason, their ^FortuneJack casino, their rules. You can't much complain, the rule existed before this specific case.
I will look at the whole discussion once again, maybe I made the wrong decision earlier.

Ok you think I am not committed, but I said I am. Maybe you live around people or come from a place where it is ok for someone's word not to be good. The thing is you're not participating and already complaining.

Then go ahead and please oppose the flag. Believe me it would be fun to see how many members oppose it.
I am saying I have been SCAMMED. If you agree with LoyceV, then it would be something for a judge to determine and not an outright scam and not that clear, and something so complicated. You both with LoyceV should oppose it.

If you were to take the rules with that very basic and "stupid" (in a positive sense) interpretation, then:
"which team will win the rest of the match"
"final result"
maybe for any English speaking person are not identical bets?

If you were to have just a little more sense of some unwritten rules in life, like if you deal with somebody he's not supposed to steal you, then just maybe, bets 2, 3 and 4 were outright scams. Of course they should be adding to their terms engaging in funny business voids all pays and plays, it's so clear.

At some point I can't argue with bad faith.

In any case, good luck everyone.

That's a silly stipulation, and to be honest it makes me think that you're not really committed to honoring the lottery.  In your position, I would want someone who's not participating in the giveaway to manage the money, if for no other reason than to ensure impartiality from the escrow.



Lol, Switzerland already gave you his answer.



That sounds pretty clear to me; i.e. they can cancel the bets.  It doesn't say that they can cancel the bet only before the event.  It's obvious they don't want people making duplicate bets on their site, probably because they want to limit the prize to something they can afford to pay.  So, either find another site without a limit or without a duplicate-bet stipulation, or don't duplicate your bets on FortuneJack.  

Maybe their terms aren't as clear as they can be, but what is clear and obvious; you were engaging in funny business, and they're protecting themselves from your shenanigans.

For choosing the Escrow there are no rules, except that the limit date is 25th of may. Or I might do the giveaway myself. I am unable to do all of this for getting people to rule on this flag and the Escrow does not. I simply need any trusted member to come out and say "I made up my mind" and he'll get the money. Only afterwards he'll rule. And believe me I won't be disappointed for whatever he does. On the other hand I won't be neither trying to interfere in his work whatsoever nor trying to argue with him on why he opposed the flag or....  I'll just leave him alone.

I will be checking Switzerland thks.

And last, if you want to state clear ToS to be in line with what they actually did, it would be (in italicized what they DON'T put in their terms)
-We reserve the right, to cancel any identical bets and consider only the first bet as valid. Cancelling these bets could take place after the outcome of the game has taken place, whether the bets won or lost. This is to be decided at our sole discretion.
-The maximum win allowed per player on sportsbets is 100,000 euros. If any player was to win more than 100,000 euros, he'll only be paid 100,000 euros, and the rest of his balance will be forfeited.

They'd lose their licence in a second, even by Curaçao standards. But their terms are not what was written above.

I have reversed the "no insult" rule. I agree it's too subjective and complicated, let's keep it simple. For negative trust you are right since we are talking about scamming I will exclude those clearly with negative score. I have edited rules to answer all of your questions. As of now these changes don't affect anyone who participated so we can make these adjustments.



I would have really loved to have you as an Escrow. Although in accepting a neutral standing on this I would already be acknowledging the failure of my giveaway. The giveaway is going to take place no matter what, I can't go back, and I agree. But for me 13 mBTC is quite a sum and if I fail in getting the most people to participate, I would be disappointed.

I see, here in 'Murica we call that fractional reduction.  Got it, thanks.

The rest or remainder, see https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=724%2F16

What do you mean by "The rest of the division"?  I don't understand where these numbers are coming from.


If anything, you should pick an impartial person who's NOT going to be ruling on the flag.  I understand that the results will be open and transparent, but there could appear to be a conflict of interest.  Especially if the rules are a bit vague (see above.)

As for impartiality, Switzerland is by far the most impartial person I know on this forum, you'd do well to have his help.

---

I won't be supporting or opposing this flag for similar reasons to LoyceV.  Casinos in general need to be exceptionally clear in their TOS because these types of "accusations" are annoying, and very rarely are they actually scams.

I can escrow, but I will neither Support nor Oppose the Flag.
If that's okay:


This means anyone from Jr. Member and up qualifies, unless they have a FortuneJack signature. There's no exclusion of users with negative feedback.
What about the users who Supported/Opposed the Flag already before you opened this topic, haven't posted here, and don't have a Bitcoin address in their profile?

This rule won't apply if I'm escrow.

Last rule

I would love to have you as an escrow, with your conditions (we can reverse the foul language rule). Nonetheless there is one obstacle to this: you'll have to make up your mind. Of course, you don't have to communicate to me what your decision is, just mention in a post when you make up your mind, and I'll appoint you the escrow and send you the money, and only afterwards you rule on the flag.

We're all humans and make mistakes and I think you're making a mistake. It is clearly obvious that I got freerolled by fortunejack. And even by their own rules it just doesn't add up. Either it's 100k max win per bet and I had 2 different bets, either it's 100k max win per sports outcome event and I had bets on 2 different matches. Either way, I should be getting my 200k win. Yet for some reason I only get half. Bookmakers are responsible for the rules they put out and for the bets they accept as I am responsible of any betting I make.

It would be a bad example of not making up your mind in front of such extreme accusations I am making. It's either true or not. Your stand on this is incoherent. Either I got scammed or not.

As far as the argument that I would be having a more accurate result without the Jr members, I think Sr and Hero Members should be motivated first by the sense of integrity and disdain in front of any act of scamming, and also for the reputation of the forum. The giveaway is just a little more incentive to take the time to read my scam accusation, we can always as well see the percentage of higher ranking members what they voted for.