Topic: [IBCO - suspended] ⚽🎰 Casino Critique⭐ FREE Chip for BCT Members ❤️‍🔥 (Read 3319 times)

Since no use of the thread, we are locking it.
Anyone interested to receive 1 Chip as gift (details), feel free to join our Telegram community and post your Bitcointalk username with btc address.

Royse777

Official Update for Casino Critique Initial Bitcoin Chip Offering:
The team decided not to hold the IBCO right now. The only chip offerer with 5 chips has been refunded with the following tx ID.
The escrow setup between CC Chief, Hhampuz, and DireWolfM14 is officially close too.
We removed the escrow address from every possible places however if it left anywhere then please let us know.

We always stay close to our bitcointalk community and the Free Chip for bitcointalk members are still valid. You are welcome to request us a gift chip, if you are worthy to have a gift from us then we may reach out to you personally too.

According to the IBCO spreadsheet, 499-27 Chips are still available for the community and other marketing purpose. Feel free to be a part of us.

Our only goal now is to launch the main platform and we are working hard for it. Once we launch it we will make update on Casino Critique Ann thread.
We welcome you to share your thoughts, suggestions, experience, knowledge related to crypto casinos on our official announcement thread which is:
CasinoCritique.com ⭐⭐⭐|⭐⭐ Unbiased & Outspoken Crypto Casino Guide

Cheers,

---

PS: Businesses or services who are interested to sponsor Casino Critique project or to buy advertising, please contact via our contact page or official Teleglram or forum PM.
Contact page (temp unavailable): https://www.casinocritique.com/casino-critique-contact-us/
Official Telegram: @CasinoCritique
Forum PM: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=pm;sa=send;u=3490051

To avoid imposters please do not do any financial transaction if failed to sign a digital message using the following bitcoin address and/or PGP fingerprint when requested.
Bitcoin address: bc1qxmgdv4n48fsljdk409zufn9wfn7cm79kwd7yw6  
PGP Fingerprint: 8183 D7E8 AF1C 1637 5EF1  69DC 8109 4C5E 48DD 8B07
An unedited staked reference to verify publicly is found here.

Absolutely not.  The individuals to whom I'm referring don't need me to iterate their names, they know perfectly well who they are.

Sorry, The Pharmacist if my tone didn't sound okay to you but I didn't mean something which you would find hard to interpret. Language barrier is a problem for a lot of people including me. Maybe that's where I and some other messed. I have no doubt about your proficiency in English, if I had I would veto when Chief decided to ask your help for proof reading.
 
Then it is very much likely that we will be returning the fund in the same address from where it has been sent.

I'm not sure how to interpret either the tone or meaning of that.  I assume you're referring to your comment regarding my reading comprehension deficit, which I agreed with.  Where is this hostility coming from?

Seriously, please don't tell me you're referring to me.  If you are, just say so.

You did say that, and yet my question about the fate of the chip holders wasn't answered.  Right now you have very limited outside funding (0.005BTC), but you said that if there's no escrow, there's going to be no outside funding.  My question was whether the already collected funds would be returned to the chip buyers or if the buyers would still be in the revenue-sharing pool--just to refresh your memory.

Thank you for the update; the project is still a go, and I'm still hoping it succeeds.

Edit:

OK, no problem.  I figured part of this had to be misunderstandings due to language.

Noted; that was the question I was asking, and thank you for addressing it.

I wasn't expecting a response, I don't need one.  I didn't expect a big deal to be made about it either, hoping for the exact opposite actually.  I suspect you misinterpreted my brevity for defensiveness.  I did want to correct something you said about sharing private keys, that's not gonna happen.  Realistically, I'm just tired of this topic, I'm tired of shit-posting sig-spammers (oh, the irony) stirring up drama just to meet their quota, and not to mention all the brown-nosing going on is rather cringe worthy, as well.

I think you are being very modest 

Since you were or are proof-reading their website text and articles yet are unsure of what is actually going on then it does not put the project and the team behind it in a good light.

I also have been looking at the IBCO wallet from time to time and have noted the balance remains at 0.005 BTC, I just do not see it increasing in any substantial manner at all. I mean, it has received just the one payment on 18th August 2022 and nothing after that even though 7 weeks have passed. That is quite telling that there is not belief outside the team that this project has any chance of success (and possibly within the team too).

It seems there is a clear intent to try to move questions and answers from this forum to their Telegram channel but like you I also do not use Telegram. I could be wrong but the obvious advantage any business (generically speaking) of using Telegram is to send out point specific information and updates and to manage the number of members within the channel but the other things they can control include censorship. The channel admins can simply ban any members that ask questions they feel are difficult to answer or those that question the direction and feasibility of the project involved.

If used correctly, maybe something like Telegram can have advantages but using this forum to effectively promote a project by using various forum members names for promotional purposes and then to imply using Telegram is a better (or more convenient) platform, just does not seem right at all.

Initially I was under the impression one of the three escrow members departed but then read two had departed. In my opinion, for the sake of clarity the onus would fall upon the project owners or team to announce why any people/forum members they used in their promotional material departed. The fact they have not even mentioned anything informative about two forum members that have departed their project (even though they were used in their promotional material) is just another PR failure on their part.

It is almost nothing to nothing substantial, from what I see.

Of course, you don't deserve such a response, do you?

Our content writer is creating content as we want a working platform before we go live. It's not about a few articles, we have a lot of articles written and more in the pipeline. It will take time as we want to get launched when we will have the targeted articles, which is more than a few hundred.

For the last few days, we have been trying to maintain a virtual office, we are not used to and of course time is a limitation but still, we are trying to fix it and share a common time to have more productive working hours.

And as I said a few times, we are still up to launch the project regardless of getting funds unless something goes very wrong.

Don't know if that's true for you, but it's true more often than I'd like for me.

And right now what I'm not understanding is whether this project is still a go, or if it's been scrapped.  I've been keeping an eye on the IBCO wallet, and it's obvious there hasn't been anybody buying chips since those first five, since the balance has been pegged at 0.005BTC.  Nor have there been any updates here.

I don't use telegram, so my bad if any updates have been posted there.

I didn't reply to your post previously since you were obviously in a defensive mode, but I was wondering exactly why you were being so defensive.  You stepped down as an escrow, and nobody made a big deal out of that as far as I know--and there's no reason to make it a big deal.  You're entitled to not participate in a project anymore for whatever reason, and though you're correct that those reasons are your business, I don't think anybody asked what they were.

So:  Any updates?

It is a valid question which was directed at the OP and their team but not receiving an answer which would remain in public view, the way they handled it is something that does not help their cause.

There is no need for any member to ask another privately as far as projects and investments are concerned, all the conversations should be run with 100% transparency in publicly visible pages for all to see unless matters are related to things the public should not be aware of (internal discussion etc)

When a member of this forum asks question or offers constructive criticism they should not be either hounded out or stifled in any capacity. Unfortunately there are several members across the forum that stifle debate simply on the basis they can or attempt to. Basically, why on earth would a team advertise or promote a project in the forum if they were not (or are not) willing to answer questions related to their project? There is no excuse for them to be offended.

I guess that means The Pharmacist and I are very limited in our reading or understanding.

Keeping that aside, why use this forum for announcements or services or securities but not for other communication such as answering questions and concerns? If all the team members are not active here then maybe their usernames should not have been promoted as it was partially one of the key reasons selling chips was thought probable even though it backfired and apart from 0.005 BTC nothing was received. Moving the conversation over to Telegram seems like a way to censor and ban anybody from the group citing any excuse the team want.

The funds that have been collected to date are still in the multi-sig wallet controlled by me and the other two original escrow agents.  Once a new escrow team is established, the funds will be transferred to the new wallet crated by the new team.  None of my private keys will be shared with anyone.

I am one of the escrow team members that decided to step down.  The decision is based on personal reasons which I do not care to discuss here.  Anyone is welcome to PM me at any time for any reason.  Depending on who you are, if you PM me to ask about my reasons for backing down from the CC escrow team I may oblige you, or I may tell you to mind your own business.  Rest assured the reasons behind my decision have nothing to do with the project scope, the other team members, or my perception of the projects ability to succeed.

If you can't read or understand, that's your limitation. Check the bold part from the quote. Don't have time? Join our telegram group. There are some people around the world. They will help you understanding everything. All of our team member isn't active here.

Did you miss the part where I'm indirectly involved in this?  Don't care; keep posting.

Because you are obviously very much invested and interested in this subject along with TrollyBad.
It doesn't look to me that someone who don't care about this would write eight posts in this topic and getting in all the nitty gritty details, but sure I could be wrong

I wasn't talking about you, but sure I can also criticize behavior of any members, and it can be very healthy to accept criticism sometimes.
Cheers.

Uh....ok.  I'm not overly concerned that people are going to lose their shirts given how much money has been raised so far, but one of the questions that's been in my mind from the beginning is exactly what I asked, i.e., whether the team is going to refund the chip buyers or keep them on as profit-sharing investors.

And excuse me, why should I ask anyone anything privately?  If you've got criticism about what's going on in my brain, why don't you PM me?  Better yet don't, because I don't care.

Yeah, and criticizing valid criticism is a great way to drop posts....dude, you're better than this.

First you said they only collected 0.005 btc and now you are concerned what is going to happen with that, it's not like they collected millions in this process  
If you are so concerned about this funds you know who escrow members are and you can ask them privately if you want.

Way to exaggerated, but I guess people need to write something in forum and like creating drama
It's not the first time some project didn't collect projected funds, so you don't need t be rocket scientist to understand why someone would drop out their escrow position.
I guess some people could spend days talking about this and create some wild conspiracy theories about 0.005 btc or $97...

Escrows were DireWolfM14 and Hhampuz, right? I assume they know what they're doing, and handing over private keys isn't part of that.

This is imho rather unlikely and would hurt their reputation. So imho while some concerns may be OK, this looks exaggerated to me.
However, people can simply ask the escrows about that. It's not CC who has to say that (if he would be malicious he could easily lie anyway).


I would see this (or any) controversy as good. I would see it as advertising. It means there are people interested in the topic. It keeps the topic visible, after all, isn't it?

Sure, anyone can see the funds haven't moved, but that doesn't mean anything as far as the escrows are concerned.  They might have relinquished control over their keys or signature piece or however it works without anyone knowing about it.  Know what I mean?

Well....Jesus....there wouldn't have been all of this controversy if all of the team members were identified from the get-go, because that seems to be where the vast majority of it stems from.  If CC doesn't go ahead with the public IBCO, it won't be strictly because of that; it'll be because there wasn't much interest in the project--but any potential interest was surely stifled by the lack of transparency on display.

So the chip buyers are fucked?  Or potentially so, at your discretion?  Haven't those two escrow cosigners stepped down or have otherwise become unavailable?  Why would you let them choose what to do with those funds?  Why wouldn't you return everything to the chip buyers if there's not going to be a profit-sharing deal?  Those escrow people haven't done any work as far as I can see, so there's no reason why they should keep the funds as a "service charge".

I asked for a fee up-front for my editing work, and even though it was a pittance, I insisted on it because I figured something like this might happen.  That said, let's hope for a good outcome.

It seems your question was not answered. He probably did not understand or misread it.

What does the OP have to say about this? As far as I interpreted this team member stated here that the previous escrow still have access to the funds.

Well, let this be a lesson for this project and any others that are thinking of using this forum to launch their businesses. If they were being transparent from the beginning people would not be asking them for transparency later thus taking the conversation towards possible integrity issues rather than focusing on the core aspects of the project.

There is hardly any controversy around. In my opinion it is less to do with controversy and more to do with lack of clarity and transparency which raises questions. Having said that what is clear is that the IBCO has failed because you have not raised anything beyond 0.005 BTC therefore pulling the plug on the IBCO and blaming it on controversy surrounding anything related to the escrow contractors would not be a fair assessment either.