I had been talking to the owner of betnomi about a possible job oportunity as their CM here in the forum for the last couple of days; I was not aware of this mess of PMs, and for the whole evening, we've been going over every question raised so far together to try to answer them the best possible way. I'm not currently working for them; I'm doing this for free, mostly because I have spare time during lockdown so I'm not associated with betnomi.
Now that that has been explained, let's go point out the obvious: the owner of betnomi doesn't know how this forum works, let alone the trust/flag system. That has lead to this mess we're seeing right now. I'm not trying to justify the actions that have been taken until now by betnomi; had they hired a CM sooner, none of this would have happened, but they didn't and hare we are now. I'll first address the questions raised in this thread, and will add the explanations to the old thread too. The old thread will also be updated, but only answering the accusations raised there. All the answers I'll give are a copy-paste (with a bit of rewording in some cases) from the conversation I've had with the owner.
Before I start, I'll once again say that I'm not associated or receiving any kind of payment from betnomi; I'm acting as a middleman between a user that does not understand how this forum works and the people that are following this thread.
First of all, I'd like to apologize on behalf of the owner of betnomi for the PMs you have received. As I have already explained, the owner has little knowledge about how trust related stuff is handled in the forum. Some of you may know think that me acting as a middleman right now is not the best idea, but after everything I've talked about with the owner, I think that's the best (and maybe only) way of addressing every issue that is brought in a calm and straight way. The wording of the PMs was also something far from ideal, but there's nothing that can be done now about that.
The scam accusation was made over a year ago, and they even never bothered to respond to it or clear up the air. Why now?
Instead, what they did was this;
--snipped image--
The ICO had been cancelled and the project became a self funded one, so there was no need for an ANN. That's why it was "deleted" (edited to just show XXs). Now that the platform is re-launching, the owner wants a fresh start, and that's why he's been reaching out to the people supporting the flag and leaving the negative trust. He didn't reply back in the day because he was busy building the platform, and apart from the lack of knowledge about how the forum works, he didn't have many time to reply to these accusations. It was not the best move, but again, we can't change the past.
I didn't get a reply from them at that time. In provably fair games, users are to be provided with the seed hash prior to the game to prove that the results aren't predetermined or manipulated. In the case of Betnomi, they give you server seed but not the output hash. The result is generated by merging the server seed with the first three clients' seeds. Even if you are one of the first client seed, in no way you can know the other two client seed provided are not manipulative figures.
I still believe they are sketchy and would not remove my support unless they come clean about the fake team and about how the game works.
I'm sorry you didn't get a reply on that, it most likely went unnoticed. Here's your answer:
3 client seeds are used to generate the out come of the game and there is the possibility a user can submit his own seed which will be included in the hashing process. If a user needs to verify anything, he can use the provably fair tool on the website. If that is not enough, he can use any SHA512 Hash calculator online and will get the same result. The platform is not provided by us, but by a platform provider that has been in the businness for over 15 years. The games are created, hosted and maintained by them and we do not have access to the source code, so there's no way we can mess around with anything. Besides, the platform provider has multiple RNG certifications and gaming licences.
(I've uploaded them into a PDF on Mega, in case someone wants to see them.) The product is white labbeled, and we have signed a NDA, so the numbers that could trace back to them have been redacted.
The platform provider has some default templates, and upon deciding which one you are going to use, they rebrand it for you. That's the reason behind the similarities and even some same terms between Suprabets, as mentioned in the OP.
I am the one who tag them first for fake team accusation. They have sent me PM as well before they start review campaign. They had tried convince me to work with them. But I just ignore their PM. But its seems they want to remove their negative feedback very quickly and offering bribe indirectly. See the last part of their message,
Please, let me know if this is something you will consider doing and of course, we will compensate you for your work.
Does it mean if I had agreed to work with them then they was encouraged to pay me a handsome amount? Isn't like something bribe?
This is indeed another case of terrible word choice in the PM, same as with
I kindly request you to remove the negative trust from our account and maybe add a positive one.
As Lauda did also point out in the other PM. Had I known he was going to be sending PMs to everybody, I'd have tried to stop it, but again, the past can't be changed. Luckily, the owner has realized that this behaviour was more damaging than helping.
Now let's get started with the old accusation. This part will be copy-pasted with a small introduction and link to this thread, to try to have a single one rather than 2.
For what I've understood, there were 2 things that lead to the scam accusation:
(copy pasted from the Open Scam accusation)
- "Abdul Rehman "UI / UX Designer", he confirmed to me by Linkedin that he did not have any links with the team, it could be a coincidence."
- "Rahul Vyas confirms that its picture and information are used without its consent"
Regarding the Abdul Rehman case:
The owner knew Abdul from past projects, and he was indeed part of the team. He was asked for his ID and a photo to be used in the team tab. There's a contrat signed too. What happened here? The name Abdul Rehman was a nickname; he had another legal name (ID provided). That could have let to a confusion with the linkeding profile; let's note that the OP had
found Abdul, rather than getting linked from the website.
Part of the contract and some conversations between Abdul and the owner of betnomi--->
PDF at Mega (some information has been redacted). The contract itself cannot be made public, since there is some confidential information.
Regarding the Rahul Vyas case:
As with Abdul, there's a part of the conversation between the owner and Rahul at the
PDF at Mega.
As we can read, an agreement was reached, unlike what Rahul stated in the scam accusation screenshots. The owner does also say that they did indeed sign a contract. Since that would be some hard to refute evidence, I've instructed him to search for said contract. Should he find it, I'll update this post/reply on the thread. As requested by the owner, some information has been redacted (payments in this case). No payment was made in the end, because in words of the owner, Rahul asked for a higher payment after his information was published on the website (and after signing the contract). That conversation is unfortunately unavailable, and without the contract to back up the version of the owner, it'll be up to each user following the thread to believe one or the other.
I am aware about the fact that the screen names in the conversation I've uploaded on this PDF doesn't match the one the owner of betnomi has provided, but we are not going to ask for KYC, are we? It's the same person, that I can say.
I think I've replied to every issue that's been brought up here, if I skipped anything, I'm sorry; it was not my intention. I'll now update the open scam accusation thread too, and feel free to and any more concern you may have here, and I'll try to get it solved.
Edit: I've just seen that OP of the old Open scam accusation has been "deleted" after I replied there. I am puzzled by this action, as that thread served as the main reference for both the flag and the negative trust provided by most users. I've
archived it in case it gets deleted. The only reasonable scenario I can think of, is that seeing that there is a new reputation thread about the same user, OP has decided it made no sense to have both threads open. It could have been moved to the archive, so that it could still be used as a reference; but I guess only the OP,
Hellmouth42 can answer that