Topic: [IBCO - suspended] ⚽🎰 Casino Critique⭐ FREE Chip for BCT Members ❤️‍🔥 - page 2. (Read 3319 times)

OP, what about this https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/telegram-bounty-casino-critique-ibco-btc-paid-40-per-user-5411538  ? since you haven't raised much funds from the IBCO are you going to pay bounty participants out of your own pocket or what ?

That bounty ended on the 26th (2 days ago) and you haven't yet made any announcement regarding the payments.

We have allocated 9,999 Chips. Any unsold Chips will be removed after few years when we will feel that there are no need for it.
But all sold Chips, Chips given as gift, allocated to give as gift will be given their share as promised.
Members are welcome to receive a free chip.
All are logged in this spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1FEo0vBAyBOE5ZFDu9Z-LmOtc7iy2UKXETl878Ydj51c/edit?usp=sharing
After all the words were given.

The 2 of 3 escrow still have the funds as you can see it was not moved. Once we will have a new setup then we will ask them to move it.

Seeing the controversy around, we may consider not having the public IBCO. If we don't hold the public IBCO then we will let the two escrow cosigners to make a decision where to send those 5 Chips worth BTC. If they want, they can keep it as their service charge, or they can send it to our team wallet which is a 4 of 5 multi-sig wallet between us team members or even they can send those chips back to the sender. The two cosigner who are not team member will decide it if we decide not to hold the public IBCO.

However, we may reach out to personal contacts, people we believe we know to pitch our project and ask for sponsorship. We may decided not to go for any of it too. Point is, regarding fund or fund raising, nothing is final yet. When a decision will be made final then there will be public update.

Rest assure, one thing is going to happen by any means, which is to launch the main platform, work hard and be one of the leaders in crypto casino industry. It's a long way to go but the team have strong personalities, we know our goal. So, all focus are on the main platform and we are working with our full pace to make it happen.

I'm not sure my question was answered or if I just didn't understand.  Whoever bought those 5 chips (in addition to the people who received giveaway chips) are still going to be sharing in a revenue pool or not?  I just wanted to clarify that they are or aren't, regardless of how much money is raised.

I've never used or been part of a 2-of-3 signature wallet, but I think I'd be correct in assuming that if one or more individuals no longer want to be responsible for signing transactions for that wallet, they'd have to relinquish control over their part, correct?  Would I be mistaken to assume that those two escrow agents who've left the project have already handed over what amounts to full access over the Casino Critique wallet to someone else?

I'm just asking here, because I admit I don't understand fully how things are being carried out behind the scenes.  And assuming the escrow issue gets taken care of, and it's only 0.005BTC we're talking about at the moment....the day may yet be saved as far as regaining transparency and/or trust.  It'd be much, much worse if the team had thousands of dollars in their account--but I think if you're claiming to be "100% honest" (that was the original slogan), the more communication the better.

I would agree. Even if the amounts being held at the moment are miniscule it is irrelevant because it is inconceivable under any circumstances that people not associated with a project can still have access to any funds. What could be causing delays to them making an announcement?

Though not impossible for any project with a determined team to proceed and maybe succeed even with a few stumbles along the way, it does not look that bright for them right now.

In no way, I will appreciate team members to be the escrow here for IBCO, even if escrow includes myself. If that's what is decided, I'll also step down from the project. Team hasn't yet fully decided what to do in such a case but we are internally discussing for the last few days.
The project will be continued regardless of we have raised fund or not, that's what I know. With having the targeted fund, things could be easier, faster while without this budget, we have to put effort much and process will be slower of course.
Regarding the 5 sold Chips, it depends on escrow again. If there's no escrow, there will be no fund from outside invested in the project.

This is a 2-of-3 signature security thing you've got going here, right?  It would be very concerning if the two escrows who either left or don't have time to be escrows still have that much control over the project's funds, wouldn't you say?  And I'm not sure what you're saying: what happens if new escrows aren't found?  Are those two team members going to be the escrows after all or is control over the funds going to be distributed in some other fashion?

What's going to happen to the 0.005BTC if that's all that's raised?  Is the team going to try to get the project started, will refunds be issued, or what?

If Casino Critique claims here that LoyceV and The Pharmacist is the official escrow of IBCO, would everyone believe this or looking for verify? It works same when previous escrow stepped down. They have signed a message claiming to be the escrow of the address shared in the OP. I would value their words than anyone else. It's their choice to step down. Where's the need of sharing why they stepped down? And of course, we didn't look for the reason because it's irrelevant.

The fund currently CC has is still in the same address where it was sent. That means both the previous escrow have access to the fund. Unless there's a new escrow is fixed, the fund will remain there.

I was wondering those same things in my last post, and I'm not quite sure why that info hasn't been disclosed.  But since nobody has told me to be quiet about the content of the communications I'm receiving I will say that I was asked to be one of the new escrow agents.  I turned that down, as I don't have enough information about the project's details, e.g., how exactly they're going to proceed in the event they don't raise as much capital as they need, how they plan on turning a profit, etc.  

And the most important reason: I don't want my name involved with a project over which I have no control and basically don't know anything more about than the rest of the public.

Hopefully the official CC account will do just that.  However, I don't think I'd be alone in thinking the wheels are coming off this project as we speak--and not in a scammy way, just in a business sense.  There's still only 0.005BTC that's been used to buy chips, whereas the goal apparently is still to raise 7BTC.  If that's the amount needed to get the project rolling, I suspect it's not going to be achieved.

What should be clarified immediately is whether the funds CC currently has are under the control of a single member or if there's still an escrow system in place whereby those funds can't be spent unless there's an agreement between multiple team members.  That info would either ease people's doubts or increase them, but it's something that should be made known.

Absolutely yes and your hard work proof-reading will be beneficial  

Was it a change of heart or a difference of opinions that led to their departure? What is the problem if the OP actually posts relevant information which would stop questions being asked in the first place. Does anybody know which two escrow contractors are leaving?

For the sake of full transparency the OP should have clarified this the moment they knew something was changing.

In my opinion the onus was and is on the OP to provide honest updates because if they are the ones operating this project they have a duty post regular updates.

See why there was a need for the English on CC's website to be cleaned up?

I'm still remaining neutral, but how is it that two escrows can suddenly become unavailable for a job that doesn't require them to do much of anything at this point?  Are the funds (that 0.005BTC) under one person's control or what?  It seems odd that anyone would leave a project that they were an escrow agent for before it's even gotten started, or two of them would simultaneously become unavailable, as OP put it.

If they're being replaced, it sounds more like they didn't want anything more to do with Casino Critique than they're just too busy. 

Yes there was a misunderstanding, you misconstrued the question as it was not related to all three escrow contractors, either way it is not an issue. I can see now why there was a confusion.

I will probably reserve any questions for another time depending on whether there are any new updates or announcements from you, or something significant is mentioned here.

Please explain, where is the lack of transparency?
May be we both are having difficulties to understand each others. This could be language barrier, I don't know.
When we say they backed out we say the reason for it is they are NOT available, they have busy schedule ahead. So it's not clear what else you want to know? Besides you are free to ask by yourself the reason from the two cosigners. It's not difficult at all.

Our story is straight forward and honest. To be transparent of the fund handling we have escrow in place (new setup will be available once ready), to be transparent in revenue collection we have multi-sig wallet between team members. What part is not straight forward? No single person is handling anything related to finance. What makes it to look bad?

It's hard to understand which part is irrelevant for you judging by your questions you are asking. All relevant information are on the website. Please get to know yourself.

Your understanding was in question because you were thinking the all three members will remain anonymous. How would it be then an escrow at all? I hope you understand the invalid point you had in your realization.

It's a waste of time for both of us unless you ask relevant valid questions that matters to answer. I hope we both agree in this.

So you were not transparent enough to mention why they were unavailable but now you are saying they have backed out. Being unavailable and backing out are two different issues.

Get your story straight and start being both open and honest if you want to have any chance increasing to the 0.005 BTC ($95) that was sent on 18th August 2022 and sits in your funds received wallet: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/bc1qy330f4q0fnavnw66lzysrx583ts0the7yyx049xclrs2zq52g87s4fy5xy

I understand very well how multi-sig wallets work and feel free to not answer anything I ask about  

I am not surprised by your lack of relevance when replying and next time you do reply make sure you actually reply to the points raised otherwise it will be a waste of time reading it and portrays your casino critique project in an even worse light than before.

You will need to wait for our next update to know who is going to be replaced. When we  are ready we will announce.

Why are we not transparent enough to comment on reasons?
They are unavailable, that's the reason that we know and it's enough for us instead of pushing them and launch an investigation against them. These are some highly respected forum members and we give them the value they deserves. They have full right to back out. Feel free to reach out to them and ask if they have other reasons and share with us please if you find other reasons for it.

Wait for updates please however isn't it a none-valid question? If all three members are anonymous then why would anyone will trust the setting. It could be same person holding all three cosigners key. Of course none will invalided the setup.

It seems you have lack of understanding how a multi-sig setup should work. You will just need half an hour of research to find articles online and understand the process and psychology behind a multi-sig wallet.

Please feel free to continue with questions that should be worth our time to response.
Thanks.

I have some questions. You claim the new escrow set up will have better security and transparency but why are you are not transparent enough to comment on reasons why two escrow team members are unavailable and whether any of the escrow agents (as they call them) will be replaced.

Will the three founding members be listed in the promotional material or will they be the ones remaining anonymous and not giving their names?

To answer properly, I am dividing your questions into two parts.

I think you missed or failed to understand our chip metric. You will find it here: https://ibco.casinocritique.com/#expensemetric
Chip are not any token or backed by blockchain, although we are thinking out any possible way if we can have it in blockchain but with btc we don't know how it's done.
Consider them just as a unit which helps us to make our calculation easier.
The maximum supply of these unit/Chips we are considering is 9,999
In the IBCO we plan to sell 7,000.
Each Chip unit means 0.001 btc that makes 7 btc for funding.
2,000 Chips out of the remaining 2,999 will be used to give bonus in private and first public sale.
499 chips out of the remaining 999 will be used to share with the community and to use in other promotions if requires.
Finally 500 chips that we are saying team is holding.
By saying team is holding it, we are meaning we may or may not use these chips in the future.

It will be easier if we use numbers to explain.
Consider we were able to sale all 7,000 chips in this IBCO. With bonus and promotion we will use 2,499 chips too.  We are working in the project, everything is going well, all are happy but at some point we realized that we need some more funding, we will use those 500 reserved chips. But if we do not need any more funding then after waiting few years we will just burn those chips. In other words, we will declare that we will not use those chips anymore. The used 9,499 chips will be then considered for 10% return pool for the IBCO participants instead of the original 9,999 Chips.

In summary, my answer was supposed to be:
1. No individual team member is receiving any chip before or after any sale.
2. No individual team member is handling any funding before or after any sale.
The record of our chips will be found in this spreadhsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1FEo0vBAyBOE5ZFDu9Z-LmOtc7iy2UKXETl878Ydj51c/edit?usp=sharing

How is it you expect to raise funds when you deliberately avoid naming all the names associated with your project? Mostly, investors need to know who they are dealing with before they part with funds.

It raises the questions as to who really is behind this project and what your motives are for hiding their association. It also leaves a void knowing what their role within the project is and how many of the pre-sale tokens will be divided up for their expenses.

Of the 11 members you listed, can you give a breakdown of which member will receive how many chips percentage-wise from the pre/post sale chips as remuneration for their input?

Hello community, please be aware of the above.
Please do not send any chip until we provide information of the new escrow wallet.
Sorry for any inconvenience.

Please follow the following quote too to read update about new escrow setting we are working on.

Right now we put only those who we thought are necessary. In time we will have others listed in the IBCO site or in the main platform again when we will think it's necessary. If they are placed then you will have the information that is available publicly.

There are 11 forum members mentioned in the OP promotional material. Three are escrow and eight others.

Is that whole lot or are there any others that are part of the team/project but are remaining anonymous?

@P2PECS, feel free to ask any question related to our IBCO I would be happy to answer it.

Around 30% contents of the main platform is ready. As per our roadmap we will launch our main platform in time, if things are done before the time given in the roadmap we will lunch it without waiting, after all main platform is our key business.

The IBCO is not as important as the main platform for us. If we are able to raise the required funds then it will support us doing our tasks/marketing smoothly without worrying about lack of funding and managing it from own pockets. This means if we do not have the successful IBCO then the project is NOT going to stop. Our team members are aware of it and they understand it fully. We are proud to announce that most of us are like minded onboard. The success of the main platform matters most for us over the success of the IBCO.

---

IBCO update
We are still working on some elements of the site like designing the pitch deck. We may introduce a promotional video too but that's not priority. Once the design of the pitch deck is ready then we will reach out to personal contacts who are not aware yet, to offer private sale. In the mean time if anyone wants to join our private sale then they can send Chips. In private sale our cap is 1 btc which means we are selling 1,000 Chips. Additionally 1,000 Chips will be used to give as bonus. We have buy 1 get 1 free offer for this phase. In private sale total allocated chips are 2,000.

Anything over 1,000 Chips ( >1 btc to <4 btc) sold in the private sale phase, will be considered for public sale 1.
Please check more details on IBCO metric section