Topic: I do not endorse any website in my signature.<--Yes You Do! - page 4. (Read 4911 times)

Indeed I found it to be inconclusive. However I did find suspicious things and I strongly advice you or any other not to promote it. That would be more responsible in my opinion.
I just didn't find enough evidence to demand it or to add negative trust to those who promote it.

---

Regarding special attention to Staff, DT or trusted members I think we all should be more careful about who we promote, however I think this is specially true for Staff members because newbies see that Staff label on their profile and may think the prompted site is endorsed by the forum.
That's not the case with DT members, there's no 'DT' label which may confuse new members. Very trusted members should be extra careful too.

Someone finally gets it. If anything, DT members should have higher priority in such cases IMO.

I try to rationally accept the disrespect. That's the best that I can do I guess. I can't know to whom those alts belong, although the previous 2 threads were created by shills.

I don't see why I would do that.

How you forgotten about admin(s)?

No, you said "I wouldn't advertise for any coins in the world" and posted 2 links, which is less than OP PM'd me and equally useless to me ATM. That was about 2 days prior to the first PM of OP.

It should be, and would be deleted if it was not appropriate. Rules should be applied without exceptions regardless of a members position.

This is a trust related issue, right? So mind telling me why I'm being prioritized as a staff member (e.g. over a DT member) only when it (could) is 'negatively' effecting me? Additionally, don't be surprised if more 'random' people, that I've had strong discussions with (e.g. Core vs. Classic), hop on this bandwagon.

I've actually PM'ed EcuaMobi asking him to please provide me with the results of his own analysis, and it was inconclusive:
I suggest building a strong case again Betcoin first (no, you don't have that). That's the best way that you could 'effectively' stop their campaign if the company was truly a scam. This is what I've written via PM to someone and it still holds ground: "All that was required was to either give me a few days of time or provide a conclusive 'investigation' by a non-random (or possibly DT member) and it would have been removed." Guess what I had time to do besides sending a few PMs because of this thread (reading, processing and formulating takes up a lot of time) so far? Nothing. Additionally, the first experienced DT member concluded that there was no conclusive proof.

Great thread OP. I fully agree with you, it is bs.

"It's become acceptable to help a site become trusted without taking any consideration into whether or not they should actually be trusted."
Yes, it has clearly become acceptable for staff to take no consideration.

Good advise given from Lutpin. Completely agree with actmyname.

Do a little more research please.  I am not quickseller.

This thread was an attempt to bring attention to what I consider a major issue that many don't seem to take seriously. Seriously though, ask around anyone active in the gambling forum, I'm not Quickseller and my posts are not influenced by his agenda in any way.


The progressive Jackpot is only the most recent explicit issue, it is NOT the ONLY issue and, in my opinion it's not the biggest. 

There are many others.  So many I honestly don't even know where to begin.  Most of them involve what is likely an honest mistake made by Betcoin handled in an extremely unethical way. 

Please, read this thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/whats-wrong-with-betcoinag-heres-a-list-1322261

The reason Betcoin appears as if these issues don't exist is because of the 50+ signature campaign members some of them are very happy to be members of one of the highest paying campaigns.   When they defend Betcoin against "trolls" like me, Betcoin pays them bonuses.  When users are "spamming" their thread with legitimate questions, campaign members provide someone else to respond to.

To be clear, this type of behavior is not something all campaign members participate in and I'm not accusing Lauda of being one of them.  However, any reputable member of the forum who joins the campaign makes the entire campaign more reputable.

Here is one example of how Betcoin addresses issues, read the post and then the following few responses:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14470101

They never responded to dooglus, by the way.

The issue he was asking about involved a glitch that caused too much rake to be taken from Nov 1 - Mid December. (in cash games, they take a fee out of every pot based on the size of the pot and a few other factors)

A player reported the issue the first week of Nov, betcoin ignored it for over a month and continued to advertise a rake structure that wasn't being followed.

In December, they announced a rake increase and denied the issue happened.

From December - March they ignored the issue.  Me and a few other members posted about it nearly daily, along with signature camp members that didn't seem to know much about Betcoin other than "great promos and fast cashouts!"

In March, they had their "Betcoin to return overcharged rake" promo which made a lot of players happy but was not an appropriate way to handle the situation.  I am still confident that there are players who were overcharged 10+BTC and didn't notice.  The only way one would notice is if they own tracking software and understand how to use it.

---

---

---

I'm not saying anyone should just snap neg rep anyone.

I'm saying we have a serious issue here.  It's become acceptable to help a site become trusted without taking any consideration into whether or not they should actually be trusted.

When I see a staff member do it, I see an obvious and legitimate response for every member who may be asked "hey, why are you promoting that site?"

Lauda, why won't you remove your signature until you have done your due diligence?

If the money is so important, you should consider the research equally important.

If it's not about the money, just remove it until you have time to educate yourself on the situation. 

Otherwise you're not just promoting Betcoin.ag, you're also promoting ignorance.

If you recall, back when you joined their campaign, I've advised you against promoting that particular casino/brand, Lauda.
Right now, I'd go forward and once again do the same thing. I don't think you (or anyone else) should be promoting them in your signature.
You shouldn't be advertising betcoin.ag given their current situation and how they handle problems/themselves.

That being said, I would advise everyone else being enrolled in that campaign to do the same, drop it.

Possible unrealistic solution, you can try to report one of his post (just to see what it will happen).  /s

I don't know about Betcoin being scam but Lauda is a bonafide Staff Sig Spammer

He's an excellent mod but also a sig spammmer.

He should just own up to it and tell everyone to fuck off.

Let me channel Lauda.....

"Yeah I'm an effen sig spammer bitches, what you going to do about it"


Seriously what can any one do about LOL


~BCX~

When you are wearing a signature, you're advocating for that product. You're encouraging the use of it, and what if the source is not reliable? This seems as if it's a personal attack, but a part of the problem lies in the fact that as EcuaMobi stated earlier:


Although the only explicit issue you can find about Betcoin is the Betsoft situation, research is still a necessity especially since TwitchySeal has laid out all of it on a thread. Doesn't the jasonort problem at least raise any alarms as to the fact that there might be something else going on? Even though he got his "settlement" (which is definitely a fraction of what he should have gotten) the entire situation started off with Betcoin's ignorance, which has happened on many occasions.

I wouldn't worry too much about it.  It's more than obvious these anti-Lauda threads are started by Quickseller alts.  No one respects that scammer.

This is not a personal attack against Lauda - May be BetSoft or Betcoin.ag could call that.. I can see both sides. OP thinks that being a staff, Lauda should not promote this particular site.

Frankly speaking,I don't think it makes much sense to apply special signature rules to Staff as well.As said,there are more than 30 members carrying the signature of betcoin.ag who should be equally responsible for promoting the casino.No special actions needs to be taken just because you're a "Staff".

Correct.Otherwise,makes it look like a personal attack.

Understood. It would be only natural, according to what you're saying, that the service in question received those ratings first IMO. So mind telling my for what reason am I singled out here, out of so many members (there's at least 1 DT member wearing their signature) and Betcoin itself? After a certain amount of time and accounts it becomes obvious to one.

I'm not and I haven't done anything wrong either. What you're saying would only be fair in case that every single participant receives that negative rating.

Not trying to offend you or something but if it is any other member on the forum due to any causes either a scam accusation is opened or found promoting something which is liable to steal money from users indirectly,DT members without even looking into the matter ,give a negative reputation temporarily which could be resolved later .Doesn't the same rules apply to you as well ?For example ,Cryptodevil negative reps any members who even post a comment on ponzi sites,with or without intention.Most of the times the accusation is solved later,I remember Shorena doing the same,negative rep first and remove the tag once the accusation is resolved or if the member comes clean at all.I don't think you should be given special privileges,the DT members should apply the same rules to everybody.Just my two satoshis.  

Incorrect. I have asked the OP (kindly; now I see that it was a mistake) to give me some time because I have a backlog that needs to be worked down from. I added that disclaimer temporarily until I am able to verify what is going on, yet I get attacked even for that.

This has become a daily routine now.

All that was required was to give me time to evaluate the claims and decide or provide a conclusive 'investigation' by possibly a DT member (which ended up as inconclusive). Until that time, I don't see why I should comply with the requests of a random person. I don't even want to comment on this further, it is quite disrespectful at best.

---

Don't be surprised if Lauda is at fault for all of those as well.

Not in my eyes.

Do you mean all casinos, that still have BetSoft games on their site and, are or should be aware of this resolved accusation are scam?
If they had not updated the payout table I might have agreed with you.
Do let me know which slots or feature of BetSoft is not working as it should be?



Wait a couple of days and go ahead negging all the above and the members wearing any of their signature.  

BetCoin is still actively promoting BetSoft games on their site, therefore, in my eyes they are just as responsible for the non-payment of the jackpot, especially now that they cannot deny that they were not aware of the issues.

Regardless of the fact that Betsoft software will cause jackpots to not be awarded when they should be, and regardless of the fact that this will happen at any site that hosts Betsoft games, it is still a possibility that this will happen at Betcoin, and as long as this is a true statement, Betcoin is a scam site. If Betcoin wants to get this label removed then they should pull/remove any BetSoft games from their website.

Until the above happens, anyone promoting Betcoin is promoting a scam site

I don't think Lauda wearing a Betcoin.ag signature is a big deal.

There are accusations about every single site out there. This (resolved) accusation of not awarding the jackpot if I understand correctly is actually against Betsoft. As they stated, he wouldn't have received the jackpot makes no matter which site he was playing at.
The only thing I see shady is the way they changed their terms without changing the last updated date.

I have absolutely no history with Lauda aside from a few pms, all within the last 48 hours. 

 I just want to bring attention to the damage that is happening from people thinking they are not responsible for the site they are getting paid to promote and think since Lauda is a staff member, they serve as a good example to prove my point and also deserve to be made an example out of.

I don't think any site should be able to run a signature campaign on this forum unless they are prepared to respond to any reasonable question.  Ignoring players should never be considered acceptable.

Here are all 3 pms I've sent to Lauda.  I won't post the 2 responses, but to summarize: Lauda does not know about these issues.  THey aren't a priority and it will be  quite some time before they are able to investigate on their own.

I have not received a response to the final pm, and they continue to promote Betcoin and post in other forums. 


PM #1

(No subject)
« Sent to: Lauda on: July 07, 2016, 11:14:56 AM »
Reply with quoteQuote  ReplyReply  Remove this messageDelete 
Hi,

I noticed you've joined Betcoins signature campaign and hope you will reconsider considering the influence you would have over potential future Bitcoin users.

Am I right to assume you either haven't looked very closely or  don't understand the many accusations that have been made over the past year+ against them?   I'm not questioning your intelligence ( I've read some of your posts, I know you're one of the smart ones ), if you aren't familiar with or interested in gambling/poker, I wouldn't blame you for not digging through long threads which are mostly nonsense anyway. 

Betcoin is doing damage to the future of Bitcoins Casino and Poker industry by  establishing a negative image to potential players and setting pathetic standards of what current players should consider acceptable.

Their strategy is clearly focused on building their reputation artificially with bribes and signature campaigns rather than earning it.  They use their campaign members (most of which are never seen playing at Betcoin) to bully or discredit actual players who bring up legitimate issues. 

They also create the illusion that Betcoin has made themselves publicly available while ignoring the serious issues, they instead thank users (who they are paying) for any kind words or softball questions.

 I really hope you will take this seriously and respond with your honest opinion,  I'm more than happy to explain anything you don't understand.  I've gone out of my way to provide evidence to support all of my accusations, here are just a few of many, I don't know where to begin really, just let me know of any questions.
 
My big collection of Betcoin issues:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/whats-wrong-with-betcoinag-heres-a-list-1322261

Recent issue about BTC500+ jackpot (resolution was simply  bribe to silence player)
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/betsoft-non-payment-of-jackpot-1517648
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.15426182
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.15424335

Some quotes from Dooglus (I figure everyone trusts him, right?)
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13025707
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14470101

Thanks

---

---

---

---

---

PM #2

Hi,

It's disappointing to get this kind of response from a staff member.  You're accepting money in exchange for promoting Betcoin in your signature, clearly you have an ethical obligation to the community to make every effort to avoid driving traffic to any business that fails to meet whatever ethical standards you consider reasonable.  "I don't have time" is just such a bad example to set.

Your decision to promote Betcoin will influence the opinion of potential Betcoin customers, other signature campaign members and also Betcoins competition.  Whether you like it or not, you're sending a message that on some level, Betcoins behavior is acceptable.  Your "I do not endorse any website in my signature." disclaimer is not a substitute.

Here's a few bits that should take no longer than a few minutes to digest. Hopefully it will convince you that to at least remove the Betcoin signature, until you have taken the time to inform yourself and draw your own conclusion. (I'm happy to help if you have questions)

---

In the last 48 hours, Betcoin has been blacklisted or had warnings issued on several of the most established Casino Affiliate Sites.

Here's a screenshot of three of them: https://i.gyazo.com/e2a153be33ff644bc3631a4fb8d9a6c8.png

Left: https://www.casinolistings.com/casinos/rogue-warnings-blacklist
Top Right: http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74146
Bottom Right: http://www.latestcasinobonuses.com/casinos/betcoin.html

---

In this post I shared evidence that Betcoin changed their terms without changing the "last updated" in attempt to void a 505+BTC prize after it happened with the hopes that nobody would notice.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.15424335

They eventually changed the "last updated" several days after being exposed.

Stunna, one of the more respected members here, responded:

---

Some of dooglus' statements from months ago:

---

And finally, an anonymous person who seems to have been your campaign manager had a conversation with me in a google document.  Whoever it was clearly considered the fact you were joining a great success:

---

---

---

---

---

PM #3

Re: (No subject)
« Sent to: Lauda on: July 08, 2016, 08:27:32 AM »
Reply with quoteQuote  ReplyReply  Remove this messageDelete 
It's irresponsible to advertise a business without any due diligence.

Please, stop promoting Betcoin in your signature until you are confident enough to take a stance. 

Another personal attack against Lauda.  I don't know if it's because Lauda represents the establishment that has labelled QS a scammer, or he just hates Lauda because Lauda is honest.

I don't think this is a personal attack. The OP has been very active in trying to get shady casinos to payout what they clearly owe their players when there have been disputes in the past. BetCoin (the website that Lauda is promoting via her signature), apparently has a fairly long history of being extremely shady.

From the looks of it, the OP contacted one or more members of BetCoin's signature campaign, presumably asking them to remove their signature, and Lauda responded by posting a BS disclaimer (that is not even visible the majority of the time) that she does not endorse any website in her signature.