Topic: Royse777, Bitlucy and long story in brief - page 10. (Read 9492 times)

Mate, what are you talking about?


He was in on the scam all along with LUCY and now they had some disagreement over the scammed funds. He was telling me in LIVE CHAT that they lost all customer data and he continued to work for them and refuse payouts to people of their own deposits!



https://ibb.co/ydgt07N



ASK HIM to explain this chat.

based on all that has been said in connection with this case, I withdraw the red tag by my side and change it to neutral.
I don't think Royse intended to deceive anyone, in the end, he is most damaged here. With financial losses, he has seriously damaged his reputation here. I hope for some positive developments in solving the whole thing.

I see no reason why the original owner of Bitlucy to be protected. all available information should be provided, he is a scammer and if this time passes without any consequences, it is certain that he will continue his business.


this is how I see the whole thing. most often honest people are naive because they do not expect to be deceived, I would say the same is the case with Royse. However, if he wants to work as a manager, he must recognize such things and that’s what sets good managers apart from the average.

Hi Moon.

I know I am a nobody on this forum, but, Roysee I must say so far has been a man of his word. He said he will rectify the issue out of his own pocket. He’s almost maintained conversation with me for the last ~12 hours.

I’ll be sure to update you all as and when he closes my ticket from the Google doc.

I appreciate there is more people than just me, but, one step at a time..

Royse777, I know you're a good person but damn... you gotta do the right thing before red tags start piling on. Keep in mind that most people are very reluctant to neg-trust someone of your reputation, so if you start getting those tags you messed up hugely.

I am glad you finally explained your situation in public Royse.
I watched one documentary about scammer who tricked and scammed many people (mostly females), and this case from Royse reminds me a lot about that documentary.
To know how scammers work you need to study and learn their behavior, and I think that Royse didn't have much experience with this, so it's understandable how Lucy scammer tricked him.
Pattern is the same, scammers like this are professional liars that usually live luxury lifestyle, they travel a lot around the world, and they are documenting this with photos and social media.

I think it is now clear for everyone that Royse is not a scammer here and red flags against him should be removed or at least turned to neutral, but Royse is guilty for being naive and for not asking help and second opinion from other forum members earlier.
He is just a human and it's not like all of us didn't make mistakes before in our lives, but maybe Royse can still help scammed customers with information from Bitlucy onwer.
Maybe they can report him to authorities and stop him before he recycles and rebrands his website into some new moneygrab scheme.
Good luck Royse.

PS
Maybe it's time to open Investigation topic about Bitlucy owner with more personal information.

I have no idea whether you lost $600 or not but I am posting here just to display the image you posted. What happened in this situation should be an example to any and all would-be campaign managers. Those with a long standing campaign management history would probably never get themselves in to this situation.

Any losses that could have been curtailed or avoided (but were not because Royse777 did not raise the alarm sooner) are missed opportunities to stop the scam earlier therefore it is negligence on part of the campaign manager. I do not know where you fit in to this as far as losses are concerned but if what you said is true I am sorry for your loss.

Well isnt this funny when the very man ROYSE who scammed others out of their deposits to BITLUCY is now on the short end of the stick chasing his own money.


This BITLUCY bookmaker is run by a SCAMMER. DO NOT deposit any funds there.


Just to sum it up (as the screenshot below shows) and this chat occured on their website directly with ROYSE who admitted the following:


1. They Lost all customer Balance data when moving their site
2. They can just about gather your DEPOSIT data... which means if you had deposited 1000 and won 3000 they would only ackowledge the 1000!

https://ibb.co/ydgt07N   <--- proof of this. 

I have had 600 stolen from me, sent them my deposit transaction IDS but totally ingored.

I'd say this is mismanagement from your behalf for not verify the Bitlucy team and only trust his word even though you're already go too far from it does. When you have use your own pocket money to pay the operational expenses, then I will say the man who talked with you are a scammer and seems like he doesn't have enough money for his project. Skepticism is a must when you need to deal a financial related activities, I would advice to use an escrow to prevent from this kind problem, or at least multisig wallet.

Royse777 you're not a scammer nor intentionally to scam anyone, but you're a team from a scam project which is you're still obliged to pay your clients including the winning, as long as they didn't break any TOS, I don't think the gamblers are wrong here. If you're only the campaign manager, then I would agree if you not need to pay the clients since you're not manage the scam project, but you're only promoting and you can close the campaign after there's a complain about the project.

I know you've pay with your own pocket money and resign from Bitlucy team, but that's not enough for the clients have been scammed so far. Sad to say, I demand you need to pay the whole winning amount except you're successfully negotiated with the clients to pay the initial deposit amount or other agreement.

I'm going to leave you negative tag as you haven't successfully solved the case, I will wait until all the 4 clients that have fill the google form data confirming already receiving the money from you. However I don't think it's only 4 users to be honest, probably there's few users missed this news, if in a month(s) they will comeback and asking their money, I don't think they should be blamed due to late contacting you.

I hope you're understand my point and I hope you're in a good health to resolving this problem.

With this problem, anyone should learn an experienced and trustworthy campaign manager have nothing to do with the project itself, if the project is scam, then it will scam no matter what.

Everything I can say was already said. LoyceV was completely spot-on. Royse777 has fallen into a scam and was a little slow in assessing the red flags and stop everything.
I've had in the past (in completely different situations) the impression that he/she is a bit forgiving with people, but I never thought that this kind of disaster is at the horizon.
All in all I don't think that Royse777 is a scammer, even if the handling of the problem was... bad... and even this topic came a little late.

And, as I said, this mess will be costly to get cleaned. It will probably leave a stain on Royse777 reputation, whether people will or will not be reimbursed from own pocket (and may also end up reimburse scammers too, only because they're vocal).
I am really sorry about the way all this turned out.

As o_e_l_e_o also said, the existing trust feedback already tell the story, there's no need to add anything there.



@Royse777 good luck, you need it. I think/hope that the worse has passed.

I've been holding off on making any comment on this situation until all the facts were available.

While I agree with the points made above by Loyce and yahoo (namely, you were too slow in pulling the plug and too slow in explaining the situation), I also agree that you had no intention to scam anyone. Unfortunately, given what you have told us, it seems highly unlikely the scammed users will ever see their winnings, but I do think you deserve commendation for your offer to reimburse their deposits from your own pocket.

While I can understand and don't necessarily disagree with the trust ratings you have been left, I don't feel it necessary to add to them.

I think the same.

We can give her the benefit of the doubt because of her previous reputation and the explanations given, but I think they are not enough, at least for the moment, to wipe the slate clean. And even if she had no intention of deceiving anyone and was somehow involved in that mess, I think she should have ceased all collaboration before, as there were some very clear red flags.

It’s sad how this ended up. I can't see any bad intention from Royse. But being an old member here with enough experience of how things can turn into, Royse must not have gone with this.
Almost same thing happened with me. Back in 2019, I was asked to look for escrow service to hold 1 BTC for a campaign. I had contacted with Hhampuz and everything was okay. Suddenly, the guy disappeared. After few months (can't remember, it can be a year too), he suddenly came and share me a casino he was building. He offered me % from the profit for being a part of the project. Everything was up and I was asked to launch a campaign. Some can remember that I had posted the campaign thread too as I was asked to create. Once again I contacted with Hhampuz. But the guy once again disappeared after showing some excuses when I was asking for escrow the BTC for the campaign. I was lucky that I didn’t work on his promises.

Good Luck Royse. I really wish you to get back whatever you have lost, from the monetary loss to the reputation.

Very big event to read.

The whole thing would have been believable if it hadn't come from a Legendary.
The judgment of a Legendary escrow/campaign manager who has 1700+ potential earned-merit is so weak that I have to believe it again in the bitcointalk forum where everyone fights against scams 24/7 days!

I don't know how credible the incident is to everyone else but I really want Royse to refrain from associating herself with any big project in the future. we should understand that others should not be harmed for our stupidity.


Regards

Duke

It is very difficult to argue with what you have stated based on what we have read in this thread but yahoo62278 (below) has valid points.

I think you have have pretty much covered most of what could be said here.

It would be a difficult thing to face having covered payments from his pocket to the tune of several thousand USD$ but there is a line that should not be crossed between campaign managers and website owners/operators. I am surprised someone such as Royse777 allowed himself to be manipulated to the point where all this happened and he did not send out warnings to the community when he first ran in to issues. It seems there have been multiple errors on his part and that is unacceptable conduct from a campaign manager.

Going through some posts in the Bitlucy withdrawal problem, does this acceptable? thread I still am unsure if Royse777 was a purely a campaign manager or much more than that because of the multiple roles he seems to have taken on. Was he also a part-owner or investor in the Bitlucy website too? I know stated here he was working full-time for Bitlucy (whatever that may entail) but was there more to his involvement?

I'm late to this issue - thanks for the update.  I'm reading my way through the threads.

I am not too sure how other campaign managers handle their business with their employers, and how close and comfortable they get with them, i know those who have worked with a particular manager for a long time might get a bit close to the person, but other managers can correct me if i am wrong that getting too personal with your employer, especially when your 'contract' is over the internet can affect and becloud your judgement when necessary. I feel Royse became too close to Lucy and it became very difficult to draw the line even when it was suspicious.

I feel if you didn't get too comfortably close with Lucy, you would have smelt that something was wrong, if everything was kept strictly at business level, meaning no funds everything should be put on hold, and even if you have to pay from your pocket, it should be only once, and that is when everything has been put on hold by yourself, then you can use your funds to settle the initial problems created and mitigate further problems in the future. If you fail to put it on hold, further problems will arise that could supercede the strength of your pocket and you find it hard to pay or solve.

We often have good hearts, and we think people over the internet would behave and be as good as us, but that is not always the case, trust is a hard virtue to come by these days, and if you must trust someone, it should be because you have seen their good and trustworthy deeds over time, but if you are just working for the first time, treat every red flag as a scam, unless proven otherwise. I am very sorry Royse.

Royse, I have no doubt that you are a good man, but I find that you have acted too naively in this matter, which I find hard to believe given your experience. Even though some will say that it is easy to be a general after a battle, I believe you shouldn't have allowed this to happen. I reviewed the whole bitlucy thread, and I think you had plenty of red flags to respond to. But you didn't. Furthermore, you asserted that bitlucy is the victim of scammers and abusers. Even after rebuilding the entire system and resetting all user balances (twice), you continued to complain that a number of users are abusing the system. In fact, even when you decided to stop promoting them on the forum and to lock the bitlucy ANN topic, you did not warn community about a possible scam, and your last words to the community were vague and could be misinterpreted. All of this indicates that you've worked only in your own interests throughout the whole process and never displayed any sense of responsibility towards the rest of the community. I agree with LoyceV that you waited too long, and your inability to be open about things here didn't help either.

I don't know that I can agree. None of us here really know each other, we know the persona we have created in our time on the forum. Not all successful companies are made from long time friendships either. It's ok to try and make a business with people you may barely know, but you always make sure you protect yourself.

In this situation Royse should have pulled the plug when funds started being late. Ok, I can understand he/she may not have wanted to be hasty, but red flag #2 is when they had to pay from their pocket. We are talking about a casino here, not a nickel lottery or something. They either had funds or they didn't.

It seems you let yourself(Royse777) be fooled and took way to long to respond to users on this forum. I don't think you personally are at fault for users getting scammed, but I can no longer trust your judgement as your actions likely cost other users more money by not closing shop/ warning the community sooner.

I'll remove my red flag and make it a neutral, but I think some sort of warning should stay on you for awhile. Good luck in the future.

I feel that here in bitcointalk all we have is our reputation. We take years to build it, and it may be lost at once.

Personally, I would be very reluctant to make an association with someone I barely know, risking my reputation, my money and hard work.

This might be a good lesson for all of us, to avoid associations with people we barely know .

I literally had to spend 5 minutes to understand what really happened to you and the casino all this time. It seems that everything you talk about in the thread is something to be trusted even if someone will think that it is your attempt to increase your reputation. For a manager like you, of course it will take up a lot of time and jeopardize your reputation if you have to continue to leave this issue unresolved.

I was even surprised when many people began to doubt the clarity of the payouts for your new campaign because your reputation has deteriorated as a result of this issue. By the way, I think you've got the right attitude to withdraw from the ranks of the casino team that has put you in trouble. You get paid for the job based on your explanation in the OP, I believe you are not a shareholder in it. Wish you all the best.