Topic: "ROOBET'S HOUSE OF CARDS" (Read 425 times)

Most reputable casinos, including online bitcoin casinos have a self-exclusion process. For example, PrimeDice (now stake) has a self-exclusion policy that states that in effect any bets placed by someone evading a self-exclusion restriction will be graded as a losing bet, and that it will not be possible to withdraw any balance on their platform while a self-exclusion ban is in place.

PD has had its share of people cause problems on its site, and I suspect at least some of this was driven by the presence of problem gamblers, either because a problem-gambler was trying to make up their losses via alternative means (scamming), a scammer was taking advantage of problem gamblers with too-good-to-be-true offers, or a naive person sees one someone take advantage of a too good to be true offer from a scammer, and ends up getting scammed themself.

Policing problem-gamblers, and enforcing self-exclusion bans is something that major casinos have an interest in doing.

They're part of the Kingdom, but considering so many casinos use them as their "home country", I'm pretty sure they must have different gambling laws. I don't know the details though, those islands aren't really something the average citizen here knows other than for a sunny vacation.

Is Curacao still connected with Netherlands and in what way? They have same or different passports and citizenship?

I think that I saw they are part of Kingdom of the Netherlands along with Aruba and Sint Maarten, so I don't know if they have different laws related with Bitcoin and gambling.

The Netherlands only recently allows (and requires) online casinos to register. I'm not sure if it's active yet or they're still implementing it, but the plan is to use CRUKS, which is a central register for excluding people from gambling.
That means full KYC, after which exclusion from one of the registered casinos applies to all registered casinos.

I kinda expect addicted gamblers to switch to unregistered casinos though.

If there's even such a button to start with... I'm aware of casinos not having that option and simply limiting to "well, we can delete the account instead" (so that you can register back in a few days..).

---

---

Just because (almost) everybody does the same wrong thing doesn't mean it's OK to do so. A curacao license is basically worthless, and that's precisely why most of the casinos do it, so that they can say "Hey, we have a license, look!"

This can actually be compared to BTC mixers using Cloudfare for protection; "hey, we are doing the bare useless minimum we can to be able to say we are doing something!".

---

---

This morality topic is too deep to be covered by a single thread, but as it's been described, this is the wild west, and casinos know that and act accordingly. Stake has been known to promote using mirror sites to bypass government restrictions; most casinos turn a blind eye for VPNs being used to also bypass country restrictions. ALL of the casinos have no problem with these sort of things as long as you lose money, but when you somehow manage to win, they are going to forfeit your balance.

It will all then come to your "influnce". It's naive to think that the reputation a site may have or not have on only this forum is that essential, and that all the users having problems with one site will come here, be believed and get a dispute solved. If a newby/newly created account came here saying "X (reputed) casino has scammed me freezing my balance or whatev", how many users will actually believe the casino has done something wrong? Regulation in crypto casinos is neccessary to protect both the site and its users, but many people fail to see that for whatever reasons they may have.

The thing is, as an ordinary online casino, you have no way of knowing who's self-excluded (besides those who press that button on your site) because casinos don't share this data with each other.

For example, I can't just walk up to Stake and ask them to hand me over their list of self-excluded User IDs because 1) that is a private thing, and 2) the User IDs cannot even identify my own users.

So potentially any new user that registers could be self-excluded.

That's why they usually have a clause in their ToS that says something like "by registering, you are not self-excluded at any casino..."

I know people who are registered in Roobet and  they tell me you can't really use Roobet casino and bet anything there without kyc verification, but don't trust me and try to register and confirm yourself (if you are in forbidden region use vpn).

So you would accept to regulate and kyc all internet traffic because you can find free porn and all kind of ''dangerous'' information that is not according to government narrative and ministry of truth?
Sure gambling can be bad, but corrupted regulators are even worse, and I know many cases of government regulated gambling ''educating'' kids from young age that gambling is ok and fun.

Does your government advertise state gambling and lotteries on tv and other media?
If the answer is YES, tell them to fuck off because they steal enough money with regular taxation already

The other thing that nobody seems to be talking about is fake ID. Could be a US thing but teens are well known for being able to get ID that says they are older to buy alcohol. Do you really think some ID check system is going to be able to catch the fact that person X is really 16 and not 18 / 21

Same with problem / self excluded gamblers in real casinos. With multi million dollar camera systems and a ton of other monitoring, physical casinos are still regularly finding self excluded players and throwing them out. There have even been lawsuits where excluded players have won jackpots and not been able to claim them since they were not supposed to be there. Went through the courts and universally it was more or less "Too bad, so sad, no money for you" the casinos usually donate the money to charity, but they still don't get their winnings.

So unless you shutdown all online gaming, there are always going to be issues. If you really think KYC is going to stop it for the people who really want to gamble, you are sadly mistaken.

-Dave

What's the alternative: full KYC before you can play a game?
I've seen several Bitcoin casinos that start as "the Wild West", and gets licenced in a gambling friendly country later. But for every licenced casino, several new unlicenced ones pop up. I'm already happy if they don't scam their users (like one casino that's advertised in signatures).

Okay, let's forget about Stake. How would Roobet have self-exclusion if you can play without sending documents?

Some people here don't seem to understand the difference between unregulated money (Bitcoin) and unregulated gambling that operates by using crypto / Bitcoin. I'm not saying gambling is bad; if you enjoy being guaranteed to lose money in the long run (house edge, yadda yadda) playing some games, feel free. However, there's a reason there are protections in place in many countries, and going out of your way to evade these protections shows you are willing and ready to take money from exactly these individuals that need protection due to age and mental issues.

Of course, you can say 'fuck them, freedom rulez', but I personally just wouldn't advertise a casino that lets an addict register with a new email after having their old account shut down. It's not about something being allowed or legal or not, it's just a personal, moral question.

Everyone's entitled to have their own opinion on this topic and I respect every opinion that you guys wrote here; since it's really a subjective thing, everyone must draw their own conclusion, so I don't think any discussion here leads to anything. It's more about informing and then letting folks decide what to do with it themselves.

So what you are trying to say is you need the cryptocurrency market and other business that uses them to be regulated and government should have a control over everything. BTCitcoin is unregulated and so does thousands of other shitty tokens and other projects simply created for pump and dump.

What do you think changes when sites like stake and Roobet pay a fee for regulation to the government, the giveaway they provide will come down drastically which is obvious, other than that what other major changes you are expecting. You want these sites to undergo mandatory KYC to get protection from children playing in the space, Stake already implemented that, if you provide KYC the giveaways are higher. The major aspect we need to look here is trust and both of these sites are trusted in the cryptocurrency space. You earn the trust with years of service and not when some government body say so. 

Stake and Roobet have self exclusion option if you think you are addicted, same as any regulated casino you are talking about. So what exceptional changes you are expecting when it comes under a certain regulatory body .

If you are so sure my reply was off topic you can report it and if you are right it will be deleted.

But don't take it as a personal attack, I also had a non-kyc casino in my signature for many months. It is simply that if we want the privacy that non-kyc gives, we can not ensure that minors do not gamble.

I'll explain why my previous comment was not an off-topic reply. The OP nowhere mentions the difference between KYC and non-KYC sites. And it states:


The list is not exhaustive. So I don't know where you get that this debate has to be limited exclusively to KYC sites.

Unregulated also means they don't have to hold player funds hostage until they send them documents.

I skipped through the first video for a few seconds only. My first impression: this guy makes a living off creating Youtube videos, and he loves seeing himself.
The flashy video in 6 parts isn't meant to share information, it's meant to maximize ads revenue.

So gambling is bad? Sure, but crypto is supposed to be about personal freedom, and that includes making bad choices. I don't think many people started with Bitcoin because they want government to hold their hand and tell them how they can spend their money.

Both don't allow me to use their site:
Like TV commercials? I've seen our own government broadcast commercials for the government owned casino and government owned lottery my entire life. The state lottery was found guilty of misleading gamblers for years. Most of the prizes they advertised fell on unsold tickets.
So I don't really care about government regulation when it comes to gambling.

In roobet you need to complete the KYC tier 1 when you create a new account (there's date of birth form) so they will know how old the player is.

The thing is OP discuss about Roobet and Stake which is a KYC casino, discussing a non KYC casino is off topic about this matter.

---

Fair point, I understand what the point you want to say. Sorry I didn't watch the videos since it's too long and there's no summary about it.

I can't blame your opinions, but from my perspective it's completely fine since they not force someone to gambling and it's hard to determine the addict and not in online casino.

This is not entirely correct. They say they don't allow children to play, it's another thing that they don't. Stake.com seems to be running verification processes lately, but about roobet I don't know.

However, I can tell you that the casinos that work without KYC allow children to play, among them the site you are advertising (which is mostly known for being a faucet but is a bookmaker more than anything else) .

Tell me how the casinos without KYC know if the one who is betting is a child or not and therefore don't allow children to bet on their site.

That's what I'm saying: of course they are legally completely protected and fine; through ToS and offshore location and everything. That's why I'm saying it's not an accusation of any kind towards them, just a reminder to anyone promoting it, if they are morally good with how these sites operate.

Do you have any source to back up your statements? If not then it's just like a speculation. If you accuse a casinos since Curacao gambling license isn't enough and legit, it's just like accusing almost all casinos in this forum. It's true Curacao license doesn't protect the gamblers, but as long as the casinos is legit and paying, it's okay.

The fact is both of them don't allow children to play, while addicts is different case since it should be depends on the person responsibility.

I'm not arguing that they're operating illegally or something; I'm sure they all have good lawyers and operate in locations and under terms and conditions that allow them to do whatever they are doing. However, I just wanted to put it out here like a little "PSA" if you will, in case someone was thinking they were promoting a responsible, normal, US-based casino, while in actuality it's offshore and everything..

What anyone does with the information is of course up to them!

I fully agree: the reason they operate in Curacao and stuff like that, is to allow addicts and children to play, which are banned in local casinos where they cannot go to in person. This means they consciously choose to make big money (as can be seen by them paying influencers millions monthly) off of addicts and children in essence.

That's what I would like people to know.

Of course, this is a probably legal way to make more money (everyone wants to do more money, that's why businesses exist), it's just questionable if you can justify it with your own morals and put up ads for these people.

I think Stake was actually not accused in the video series directly, but it seems to have some ties to the other sites.
Also I don't intend to say 'sketchy' in the sense of 'they want to scam customers'. But I mean that it's a weird / sketchy practice to be registered, legal, etc. in freaking Curacao, but then go and hire American influencers, to clearly market to an American audience, with their own Reddit filled with people explaining amongst each other how to use a VPN to access the site and shit like that. And it is quite obvious they are aware of a majority of their customers coming from 'restricted areas'; especially if the people chosen to market it, are from those areas.

---

Listen guys, I know a bunch of you have a conflict of interest here; and I have no interest going against these sites or ads for these sites myself, I just got aware of the situation and wanted to share it. The people in that 'investigation' are already on the case so it's not my job and I am frankly not too interested in the whole topic further. Since I watched the videos over a longer time span, I can't summarize all the information and allegations here quickly, but if you guys are interested, I might find the time in the next days to write something down textually.

Both Roobet and Stake appear to be licensed. I think most likely that both are regulated by their licensing agency, and both also almost certainly self-regulate to certain standards.

Both also appear to have resources for those that are addicted to gambling, such as the ability to self-exclude themselves from gambling on their respective websites.

Further, the low house edge of both Roobet and Stake allows their customers to gamble more before the EV of their customers' cumulative bets is such that their bankroll will decline to zero.

There are plenty of things that traditional casinos do to entice gamblers that crypto casinos do not do.

I know one more thing called Bitcoin that was also unregulated, it's probably still unregulated in some countries, and it also has no protections for kids and addicts.
Smart kids got rich playing with their computers mining some worthless thing and all that totally UNREGULATED  
Gambling addicts existed forever and you can't cure or protect them with more and more regulations.

Unregulated =/= sketchy. There are several unregulated casinos that are paying out just fine.


Stake actually has a gaming license so not sure where you're trying to take us with that statement.

Op, did you base your accusations on these videos? If that's true, can't you summarise the major substantial portions out of it? Watching it will only make my time spent on videos with so much 'nonsense' in it and I am not fond of doing that.
However, you must have opened scam accusations against those names if you believe that they cheat on their users or don't follow AML guidelines themselves and even launder money. And instead of telling all this to the community here, there are authorities which these gambling casinos claim to have been licenced by, if so, can't you throw a complain there?

This thread ought to be in the gambling section or Scam Accusations, although I wouldn't consider it a proper accusation.

What you described above could apply to pretty much any unregulated online casino in operation today.  None of them care about problem/addict gamblers or money laundering or age restrictions, and that's also true of a lot of physical casinos as well.  They're in the business of taking money from people who like to gamble (which I personally find a silly thing to do), and they know damn well that the longer you play on their site, the more they're going to take from the player. 

The casino business model has always been a shady one, whether you care to admit it or not.  Roobet, 1xbit, and all the other sites have varying degrees of trustworthiness as far as being able to withdraw your winnings, but don't kid yourselves about the inherent advantage-taking they all engage in.

I would also like the OP to explain the arguments why these houses should not be promoted instead of sending us to watch videos.

On the other hand, there is one thing you say that is false:


Stake.com has a license:

is licensed and regulated by the Government of Curaçao under the gaming license 8048/JAZ issued to Antillephone.

But yes, some casinos, even some others that are advertised on the forum and that you have not mentioned, operate without a license, others operate with a license from tax havens and in theory should not accept people from certain countries but they turn a blind eye.

I can agree that I would like all the casinos in the world to have responsible gaming options and control to avoid underage gambling, but with the importance that gambling has had since the birth of Bitcoin and continues to have and in this forum itself, when you tell people that they shouldn't promote them on the forum it seems to me that you are swimming upstream.

Don't hesitate to watch the video I made 1 month ago : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbYLxrM5NdU
ROOBET'S HOUSE OF CARDS - EP.1 

I want 9600 baud modems back. Watching hours of videos when a 10-minute read would suffice is going to be the death of this civilization.

Anyway, I stopped when the beard-dude with his pube-covered microphone feigned outrage about people losing money in casinos. How does he imagine gambling works?

Let me know if there is some substance somewhere in these videos, preferable with direct links or transcripts.

I feel like this thread should be on the reputation board since the topic has something to do about a gambling site's reputation.

I applaud your concerns but I doubt you'll see much response/change regarding the members removing the signature or the avatar of the gambling sites in question. I might be wrong though since it is just my opinion.

I am posting this in Meta, since I see lots of people promoting Roobet and Stake.com in their profile picture and signature.
While it's surely allowed to advertise for pretty much anything on this forum, I want to get the information out here, especially to the ones collecting money from promoting this site, that it's an extremely sketchy website to say the least.

It is an off-shore, unregulated crypto casino. I have nothing against gambling, but due to being unregulated, it has no protections for children and adult addicts, compared to legit casinos and casino websites, for example.
It also seems a lot of the money is coming from CSGO gambling scams of the past and they wash part of that money through this new super sketchy business.

If you have the time, give this a watch; it's a quite thorough investigation which includes interviews with some of the accused parties and lots of blockchain analysis, which may be interesting for some people here who would like to follow along or find out some more info on their own!

It seems, that all the sketchy companies (which I also see in signatures and profile pictures), include: Roobet, Wizza, Stake.com. I understand everyone needs to make a living, but if you promote them, and didn't know about how sketchy (to say the least) they are, you may consider to reconsider sponsoring them..  Just a friendly PSA to y'alls.

SteveWillDoIt's Dark Secret - ROOBET'S HOUSE OF CARDS EP. 1
A Deep Dive Into Shady "Influencers" and Roobets... (Pt. 2)
NELK's Biggest Gamble - ROOBET House Of Cards Part 3
A Deep Dive Into The NELK/WIZZA Giveaway... - ROOBET House of Cards Pt.4
CONFRONTING STEVEWILLDOIT - ROOBET’S HOUSE OF CARDS EP. 5
The FBI NEEDS To Step In.. (ROOBET House of Cards PT.6)