Topic: Royse777, Bitlucy and long story in brief (Read 9492 times)

There will be no PM between JollyGood and me. I do not trust him. I will say dear he will make it deer, I will say beer he will make it bear. Then new open topic to explain dear and beer then another new drama.
I hear you buddy.
Thanks. I would like a peace.

Yeah, I think JollyGood actually turned from good scam buster into ghost hunter, who is giving negative feedbacks like candies, but Royse777 you are also keeping this circus show alive.
I ask you to cool down, apologize and move on, but no, you continue again with new analytical post, justification and going into attack mode.
Just for stats, top five posters in this topic according to Ninjastic website:
https://ninjastic.space/topic/5403679

PS
JollyGood if you want to ask your 1001 question to Royse than ask him with private messages.
Royse, for the last time I am asking you to chill, because you are not going to help your case like this.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60422111
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60425170
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60450938
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60462680
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60488534
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60491108
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60532892
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60570452
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60573935
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60577306
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60582400
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60583312
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60590102
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60591168
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60592966
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60593767
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60593835


JollyGood explained himself

---

Until now JollyGood made 17 (+/-2) posts only on this thread. Most of them are by asking questions. He then elaborates his thoughts of why he was asking the questions and what he thinks all about. All these posts are long repetitive posts, unnecessarily longer then it was supposed to take (Are you working on applying the next chipmixer open spot) . Poker Player was correct in his comparison.

In his long line of texts he asked many questions that clearly means he did NOT bother to do proper case study.
How can someone spend hours of time for days without doing their homework correctly? Or a) this is intentional attack because he felt unnoticed of not adding him in the PM circle / b) he felt insulted because I was not responding his nonsense / c) I was criticizing the way he justifies a case / d) to achieve some name from the bad situation I am in / e) anything else?

One will need to read the post (^^^)to understand the context.
The answer of all above including many questions were already made in the first post. For example share of GGR.

To conclude,
In many cases but safe to say in my case, JollyGood did not do proper case study. Which makes me believe that he does not do proper case study of the allegations he makes against anyone or any project.
If a long lasting member like me is having very difficult time to handle his nonsense clueless allegations, unnecessary demands which I am not comfortable to share with him furthermore he personally has no business with it then imagine how difficult it is for new users and lower rank users who has not established them before going face to face against Jolly.
JollyGood takes the opportunity of him being forum police/lawyer and leave red tag to the users.
I do not trust his judgement. His motives are questionable.

---

To make it worst, this is his reason for him to leave the negative tag. Because the flag is inactive which was a combined effort from many users. Since the flag is not active he decided to use his sole power of using the red feedback.

Don't we know the answer to this already? Bitlucy has gained a reputable face in the community, something that made people trust it easily, a face that was to blame when everything has fallen apart.


Indeed. Somehow the communication in this issue was.. sub-standard... (for example, I don't understand why the closure for the famous google form were not announced^{[or I just missed that??]}, it could have been helped).
But with so many people pushing Royse - maybe some for good reason, but certainly some others simply for their own benefit - rushed and heated answers are not that much of a surprise.

---

I try to stay somewhat away from this drama, but I still want to say something to JollyGood: you've done very good job many times in nailing scammers, but I have a feeling you're exaggerating in this matter. Of course, I may be wrong, still...please think on this.

My assumption was that sharing ownership was based on a gentlemen's agreement.

I just shared here what I had to share. I didn't say that Bitlucy CEO and Royse777 are different people. I said it doesn't look to me like they are the same person. You can read the conversation and Judge. I don't have to make a judgment.


Because Royse didn't send you the chat conversations and transaction history in your PM?

it's true, I got some kind of answer. I would say that there is a realistic explanation for not publishing certain data. Apparently, everything has gone so far that he justifiably worries about the safety of himself and his family.

however, I think that the whole communication, in this case, and everything that happens afterwards, could have been set up better. To avoid wrong interpretations and subsequent explanations of the same.

The company and legal status of BitLucy Casino have never been publicly disclosed, as far as I know. According to their T&C, the legal jurisdiction is Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, although I'm not sure that is true since all other information is unknown. No address or other contact information.

Here is a snapshot of the BitLucy T&C as of June 23, 2022:
https://archive.ph/iRVLo

I believe there were several iterations of the documents since they changed the software and started from scratch several times, but this is the only copy I'm aware of (and probably the most recent one since they shut down the site for good not long after).

I beg to differ, had he wanted to add my name he could have but I am not part of any drama 

You are part correct and part incorrect.

No, I am not part of any drama just because I asked questions and refuse to accept most of what Royse777 is stating but can the same be said about you? Since you uploaded images of alleged chats which you claim as proof that the elusive Bitlucy CEO and Royse777 are different people, all that by using an alt-account instead of your regular forum account, you have made yourself part of the drama.

Yes you are absolutely correct I am not satisfied with the answers.

No, I do not want special treatment from Royse777 on the contrary I just want the part owner of a scam casino who held the official title of "Co-Partner and Marketing Director" to stop being economical with the truth and if possible for her to stop using her bouts of aggression and tantrums as misdirection tactics because questions related to a scam should be answered.

Unimaginable!
Mr. Bitcointalk forum Lawyer, do you even do your case study?

May I ask you now, you keep rumbling all these what to achieve? I question your motive.

If you think you are wannabe Lauda then you have a long way to go to meet her/his standard.

I believe I read another member quoted 10% but did Royse777 ever state the percentage voluntarily? I tried searching but that part remains elusive.

Let us say for example it is 10%, did Royse777 ever she state what Bitlucy as a company would receive in lieu of giving Royse777 that 10%? After all, if it was the CEO who held 100% of the company but he surrendered 10% of his holdings, what was Bitlucy going to gain from it?

If there was a registered company called Bitlucy or a parent holding company that owned Bitlucy, then in order to be given 10% of that company some form of paperwork had to be exchanged. If there was no paperwork exchanged between Bitlucy and Royse777 and no contract was signed, exactly how did Royse777 gain 10% of the company?

Agreed.

With no Terms of Service, no Terms and Conditions and no Privacy Policy it will impossible to know what the company stood for before it scammed and shut down. Without those details it will be impossible to know if any clauses were inserted that allowed victims and others who wanted to start litigation (and in which jurisdiction).

May I remind
Please don't consider that it was given.

Please don't sound it like it happened today. When I was in contact with the user then bitlucy was up and running.

Do you give attention to everything I say? I hope you are not feeding JollyGood only for entertainment.

While Royse requests KYC from a customer for a company that doesn't exist anymore while insisting on keeping potentially relevant information private on her own.

Hm... Sounds kind of special to me as well.

And Don't forget JollyGood who is not satisfied yet with all the answers. He want some special treatment from Royse777

I think you forgot JollyGood.

This is no longer a Royse777 name-clearing thread (the proof was shown about 2-3 pages ago), now it's a Royse vs. yahoo drama.

I believe you overlooked yahoo's change from red to neutral?

Edit: ah, you didn't miss it, you were just wondering whether there was more you can't be aware of. Got you @PokerPlayer

I think it was 10%.

Add ;dt to the URL: there are 2 negatives from DT.

I have to admit that I was wrong in my previous post, as Royse777 has managed to get a negative tag changed to neutral by keeping the thread open.

So she seems to be starting to regain her reputation. Now I only see 2 negative tags but I don't know if that depends on my trust list too and someone who doesn't have a custom trust list would see more or fewer negative tags.

I asked some questions almost a couple of days ago, there is another added now. Maybe you can reply:

- what percentage of the Bitlucy company given to Royse777?
- was there any paperwork signed between Royse777 and the Bitkucy CEO transferring that percentage over?
- what was the full name of the Bitlucy company with LLC, LTD etc?
- what is the current legal status of the company and the legal jurisdiction the company falls under?
- does anybody have a copy of the ToS/ToC and Privacy Policy of the Bitlucy website?


Link? I quoted examplens, where did you quote examplens and answer his question within 5-10 minutes of him asking?