You might be able to claim that you do not have a need to defraud users, or that you've paid millions in deposits - however this looks more like a "near-miss" of bankruptcy than anything else.
And again - you might be solving all public cases, but how about all of the ones who have not gone to seek help from an arbitrator or have not complained with the company, but instead have written off their loss and have since not paid any attention? There are many people who do not use or know of Bitcointalk, but still use Bitcoin, cryptocurrency or casinos.
This is pure misinformation, BC.Game has never been even remotely close to bankruptcy. If you've ever taken the time to open our website, you can see thousands of bets being placed every minute and a fledgling community of chatters. You can have a look through the scam accusations thread and you won't find a single recent thread claiming we don't pay out withdrawals. The open cases were regarding a deposit bonus promotion that failed and sportsbook issues. We regularly pay out six, sometimes seven-figure withdrawals with no hiccups.
Neither you or I can comment officially or provably on the financial status of BC.Game, especially if you are just a PR rep. Nor can you comment on the validity of any bets being placed on bc.game's website. Your website is not a blockchain, and the validity of these bets can not be verified. It can easily be automated.
If you'd like to prove me wrong on solvency, I would recommend that you get your administrator to sign a message of cold reserves. This will shut me up instantly, and I will instantly apologize for my comments which would then be proven to be false, and I will let the casino be. I am only commenting on what I can see, and I see problems with paying users large amounts of money, holding funds for periods of time, and disputes - until this magical appearance of this account which comes after a consistent rally and months after the public complaints were lodged.
What role exactly do you play at BC.Game and how can you comment so surely on its solvency if you are just a PR representative, or are you more? What is the difference between you and the original BC.game account?
I do not think that this is a fair outcome, to profit 1.25 BTC and to use fear to force a user to accept the deal. He could have fought, if fear was not a factor.
We have not used fear to force anyone into any decisions.
The user himself said that him being unsure of BC.Game's solvency is why he took the deal. That is a decision made of fear. Otherwise, you'd have a legal case on your hands while the user fights for what is right in their eyes.
At one point I was willing to go the legal route as some people I'm friends with from the industry claimed to know the right lawyers for the job. However after considering the state of the casino and all the red flags (casino rep not active on the forum anymore, account blocks, KYC taking months, unresponsive CS, extremely generous loyalty scheme, unable to make good on resolved disputes, refusing to pay out big winners, a huge number of complaints on AG and CG to name a few) I deemed it highly likely that they are having solvency issues and might not be around for as long as it takes for an international lawsuit to bear fruit. Honestly, at this point I'm happy to have gotten anything out.
I do not think that this is a fair outcome, to profit 1.25 BTC and to use fear to force a user to accept the deal. He could have fought, if fear was not a factor.
There is always room for argument for both sides in such cases. What if the price of bitcoin had fallen since the time the user deposited? Would the user still have questioned the decision to receive 124,000 USDT?
If he was given the amount of BTC that was taken from his account and complained, then even I would have defended bc.game over that isolated factor only. However, BC.Game had taken BTC, and has not given BTC back. It's not the same asset, and a hypothetical question like you have given is not necessarily a valid answer to this part of the wrongdoing.
There should not be room for argument in cases that are fairly resolved. Bc.game have held funds hostage, made clear that there are ample cases public (and not addressing how many are not public), and now quickly resolving them to save-face, and to be able to continue operating. Others might think that is right, I personally do not think that it is. Though, we can agree to disagree, let the community decide how to treat this casino in the future, and I will watch in hope that this does not turn into a disaster of a situation like other casinos who have had similar symptoms have in the past.