Topic: Should we not get negative feedback for expressing our views? How about me? (Read 780 times)

1-You are opposing a flag where FortuneJack is involved is scamming me out of 120,000 dollars winning bets, so helping promote this website to other users.
2-No I've never touched your website Roobet, I wouldn't be tempted again. But did your avatar change just recently. Could you please tell us what were the last 2 avatars you had before Roobet?


Good to know, very tricky indeed. I tried to trick the website by betting and winning, so they fired back by stealing my 120,000 dollars sportsbets win after accepting my bets and waiting 4 hours for the outcome.

People reading this, don't be tricky on the websites @Stalker22 is promoting, understand? Or it will fire back at you (funds confiscated, you've been warned).

Thanks for your kind words, but I am confused. How did I suddenly become a scam promoter? Are you also accusing Roobet casino of scamming?


You fell into the "trap" because you tried to trick the gambling site, and it backfired on you. But hey! That's just my personal opinion based on what I've read. You may not like it, but I have the right to speak my mind, as does everyone else here, so deal with it.

I know, but this is not the subject here, if « lying is allowed ». The subject is lying, getting money by lying, while abusing the trust score, does not affect a trust score of someone. Speaking about it, like in my case, is being scorned, and punished. It’s about showing that this website, in an essential part of it, is a scam promoter.

Admins could simply give the date on which @examplens opposed my flag. This is almost proof that he reacted to the flag without checking my scam accusation, just to get the money from my giveaway.

I am just trying to convince those who read me not to trust anyone in this forum, nor any promoted organization here and fall in the same trap I fell in.

Even if the forum stores when someone "voted" on a Flag (which isn't certain), and even if Admins are willing to entertain your request (which I doubt will happen), "lying" is allowed on Bitcointalk.

Kindly keep scam accusation discussion here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/fortunejack-making-120000-dollars-disappear-from-my-account-5368279

This is not a scam accusation against Fortunejack nor a psychology lesson. As far as Theymos is concerned he can decide for himself.

Look, even after all this drama, I still would have supported you if FJ had canceled all of your bets. But they did pay you according to the terms. And you got the staked amount back for those canceled bets.

Don't be so paranoid. This paranoia is clouding your judgment. You are suspicious of everyone and probably misinterpreting events thus making bad decisions.

Don't expect any reply from Theymos either. Admins rarely get involved in such cases.

As for your tag, suchmoon should at least change it to neutral.
I am not sure about why/how you got your first tag, so can't say anything about it.

@edgycorner, don’t worry about me wasting my life on this, I am not spending my life on this forum like many others do and this has nothing to do with this subject. Don’t waste your time here as you’re saying because you’re bringing nothing to the discussion.
And congratulations you’ve been merited by the liar and thief @examplens and the scam promoter @stalker22.

As far as my case against the liar @examplens goes, I contacted Cyrus a week ago to expose his lies but no answer. I’ll be contacting theymos. I hope not all admins here are on this as well. I’m sure they can verify he is lying.

I really want to stop being a part of this and work on my paper.
I will make one final reply lol

I went through your case again, you did receive 100,000 EUR and their T&C indeed contains the "max win" clause.
I checked previous instances of their T&C, and was able to fetch this https://web.archive.org/web/20200512020750/https://fortunejack.com/faq/sportsbook
Clearly, this term was still there way before your bet. So they did not change any T&C either. It was there before your bet.

The only thing that sticks out is why did they accept your bet? You should have built your case on that. Now it's too late. You have made too many enemies and nobody wants to support you now. Turning it into a very feeble case. It's indeed a very deplorable clause, and they shouldn't have accepted your bet. But it's a question of ethics. This is why your scam accusation couldn't fly.

Your accusation did present the scurvy side of crypto casinos, but we all are aware of it to some extent (like ignoring your married friend's cold sore).

You should move on and enjoy your life it's too short to waste it


Read my reply about it. I couldn't be more accurate about what happened. It was all ego and discord.

Ok thank you for the advice, but all of those questions were asked. It didn't help my flag, even if some acknowledged that this is pure theft. Although I feel no regrets because -for the most part- they're already set in their mind of what they should do, and I've already explained it.

They don't want to increase the cost of +/- scammy websites of being on this forum by forcing them to stop selective scam some big winners, because the promoters will then be less likely inclined to do signature campaigns for them.

You should call evil by its name, and if it is my expression style that makes them support one of their promoters in scamming somebody, let it be, it means they're bad people.

Of course you aren't, one of the mob members here gave you a taste of what it should be like for you-as far as your trust score is concerned-if you dare to say something else than what the scam promoters here want.

If you believe they are in the wrong, then question them instead of bombarding adjectives. This is only hurting your case. Take a smoko.
Please be respectful.

You should be asking these questions instead of picking fights with other members

Good luck. I won't participate in this discussion anymore.

Ok thks so it's the admins of this section. I will contact Cyrus.


I thought you were gone from the forum..... In some way I am always "civil" but I don't have to "respect" liars and thieves in some other way, and I can call them for what they are. Nobody has to post nonsense messages, lie about participating in a giveaway I organize and say "I did not ask for his money" while they did. These are the same people opposing my flag.

The case here is only a case of some dishonest people in some instances, and some other instances some stupid people just following the Crowd, some sort of "group thinking".
The dishonest people are about not to increase the cost of their scammers advertising on this forum. If they were to say to Fortunejack.com you'll have to pay, more or less scammy websites advertised here will recalculate the real cost of being on this forum since they'll also have to pay their scammed victims. On the other hand, look at the LTCCasino scam accusation. They got flagged even before their 3 months investigation was over as per their terms and conditions, and they were just saying they were investigating. Why? Because they don't do signature campaigns here. This is the nasty business of some ungodly people who believe in nothing else than dirty money.

Admins are Cyrus and theymos.

I played devil's advocate in a maieutic manner and got passionate about it.  Twitchyseal and I took a diametric stance on the matter which resulted in a heated discussion with a few disrespectful remarks by me. It was a series of unfortunate events, driven by our different weltanschauung and my little ego. Twitchyseal is the bigger man in my case, and I owe them an apology.
But your case is very much different. My matter is trivial compared to yours.

I am not going to get involved in another scam accusation.
I will leave you with some advice:  Be respectful. Don't be presumptuous with your opinions about other members. Don't deviate from the subject. Stick to the facts and always be honest. You will garner more support this way if your case is true. Good luck.

Nah come on... You're wrong because you believed your "well respected" friend @examplens, now you know he's lying. And my bet is not about whether he opposed my flag back then. It's just about what you're saying: that he is genuine in saying he opposed my flag before giveaway. All I'm saying is that he is lying. Could you please be more precise in what I am manipulating instead of nonsense talking?

It's amazing how persistent, bold and blatant you are in lying, but no wonder for someone who supports a scam like fortunejack. Just curious, are you American?

It depends. If it is someone who is indifferent towards scam promoters in this forum being given so much high trust scores and being ok with them lying without being checked, fine. If not, maybe it could be a good person who will give us this information. Do you know who can give this information?

Oh, I see. I missed that. Thanks.


I am afraid I will have to disappoint you. Obviously, I was wrong about my previous assessment because I assumed that you created the flag at the same time as the scam accusation. However, I still believe you are manipulating and lying, because of your history of such behavior. So, no, I am not interested in making a deal with you.

Probably. But I doubt Admin is going to tell you. I couldn't find the exact date on BPIP.org either, and I don't know any other external tools that keep track.

Don’t worry, I’ll make it important for you.
Don’t try to minimize the deception that is in the « trust » of your casino scam promoter group.



100%. Ok, let’s see what happens when a professional nonsense talker is challenged. Let’s bet 0.1 BTC each that if we can find some proof @examplens has opposed the flag before my giveaway for you, and after for me. I’ll let you freeroll me again like fortunejack did no problem, I guess this is perfectly fine within the casinos you promote. Would you like to take it? Or you can continue your professional nonsense talk, no problem.

@Loyce there must be a way to know on the bitcointalk server no? On the other hand, if you’ve worked out so hard on the trust system that the best of it that came out of are @examplens and @FortuneJack, what a waste of talent. You can get much better results elsewhere.

He couldn't have Opposed it last year, the Flag was created on 2022-05-08. Unfortunately, I stopped daily updates for my Trust Flag viewer, so I can't tell on which day the Flag was Opposed.

I doubt the administrator will bother with such unimportant things.

You are clearly misleading and manipulating. This is not a "serious issue" since anyone who is anyone on this forum knows that examplens is a respectable member. As for his reaction on the flag, I believe his words because the evidence speaks in his favor.

This is his comment in the original scam accusation thread:


Based on this, it is obvious that he opposed your flag back then, and I am 100% certain that you are lying.

The title is quite different from your post. Expressing an opinion shouldn't get a red tag if your opinion is constructive. But if your opinion or expression supports scammers or somehow abuses the forum trust system then you may get a tag. In your case seems you tried to manipulate the flag system by a giveaway. And definitely, this is an abuse of the trust system. Everyone is free to oppose or support. But it should be free of cost, not paid anyway.

Don't change the meaning of what I said bastard of bad faith, because you're also lying when you say that my assumptions are not true and I'm certain they are. My assumption is that examplens has lied about his participation in my giveaway and about how he got 1.4 mBTC from me. You know nothing about when he participated in my giveaway.

Can an administrator verify please when did @examplens oppose my flag. This is a serious issue since this person is lying about a participation in a scam accusation flag and about how he ended up getting money for opposing my flag.

No, your assumptions are not true, no member is at risk of doing business (trading) with examplens whether he did support or oppose your flag, or whenever he did so.

I am 98% certain that this person is lying.

Is there an admin who could verify when @examplens opposed my flag? The time at which people reacted to my flag is not on the flag. I still remember this person posting in my giveaway thread 3 days after it started saying "oh I remember this flag from back then, and if I remember correctly..." and he was a brand new reaction to my flag AFTER the giveaway was started. This would be lying about something related to transactions and he would deserve a red flag for it if my assumptions are true.

Don't give bogus links, you're misleading people who read your posts. If you look at the address, it's very clear it belongs to a big crypto business. Actually it belongs to this business: https://coinspaid.com

If you opposed my flag in good conscience, you have nothing to worry about since God will not listen to my curse. But this is unlikely the case with any person who checked my case thoroughly and has some integrity

Yes, I did oppose that flag even when there was a current discussion about the case. At the time, I didn't even think there could be a financial reward for it.
When OP ^@PaperWallet announces a reward for all who support/oppose that flag, I didn't want to withdraw my vote because that would be the direct impact of the payment (in this case avoiding participation in its contest) on my decision.
I hope I don't have to withdraw my vote from this flag because of the potential red trust.

As for the prize itself here, I received an unexpected +0.001429 BTC at some point to address from my profile. I believe it is a transaction by PaperWallet. I didn't want to deepen the story and feed his trolling and any further pointless discussion about "cursed" coins.

Though if I look at everything a little better, when we talk about "cursed" coins, maybe he is right after all. the coins he sent, however, have some negative history.
OP (PaperWallet) sent all rewards from address bc1q53dxta9y3kzlnwxsxp2h7j5tehjrqk4hrg3ak9 through this transaction but all funds are moved from 3JodN7GmkHdPgKj9G7HCkn9NDLhrcWCjVN address.

Sounds like everything is legit, except that 3JodN7GmkHdPgKj9G7HCkn9NDLhrcWCjVN address, is already recognised as used in Crypto Clipboard Malware scam https://hashxp.org/address/3JodN7GmkHdPgKj9G7HCkn9NDLhrcWCjVN

---

I did not ask for this money, nor did I expect anything from there, I decided what to do with him. no, I will not return it to PaperWallet, I just don't want to play his stupid games.
An amount of 0.001429 BTC I will transfer to FortuneJack casino, to trying my luck with "cursed" coins.

That's probably for the best. I can think of (far fetched) ways to abuse this too: punishing someone for "voting" on a Flag can stop people from doing so. Then again, offering money can do that too: some people will vote, but others will be more reluctant because of the payment being offered.

Thoroughly reviewing a scam accusation takes a lot of time, and I considered this more or less a compensation for the time spent. But there's no checking if someone even read the scam accusation, and usually companies who pay for a review want to know for sure users actually tested it.

I know, and I may not do even that after all, since it's not easy to determine when exactly someone supported or opposed the flag and what their state of mind was at that time.

Not that it matters much. My exclusions don't affect DT at default settings. Users with custom trust lists surely would know how to deal with any changes they don't like.

Note that some members supported/opposed the flag before he created that topic or, in my case, after deadline expired for his "giveaway". For example, I think examplens opposed the flag before but was paid nonetheless. Of course, with "cursed" coins.

---

You can call me a "nonsense talker" if you want, I don't care, but I'll express my opinion anyway. As LoyceV said, it's hard to decide which side to be on. The terms are not in your favor, but these were the terms, and you agreed to them when you signed up. There is no point in accusing the casino of enforcing their own terms that are clearly stated on the site.
On the other hand, such unfavorable terms and the fact that they should not have accepted your bets are not in the casino's favor. However, gamblers are free to choose the casino they wish to gamble on. If you do not like their terms, just move on to another casino.

That's because this is my conclusion, after talking about my case for a few months here. And this is payment issue not nonsense talk issue, so what matters is payment (that is going to happen, but you're just not helping).


Not so sure about this, we will see.
But what's for sure is that yes I didn't know how your scam betting websites work. In their terms and conditions there is a 100k euros limit per bet. They accept a total of 2 bets among 4 tickets, wait for the result of the game, then steal 100k win for the reason of "we have the right to cancel bets. And also sorry, we intended to defraud our users with our terms and conditions but we are also bad at writing those, just give us a pass on this as well, too bad for those who read them. Oh just a second, we've also tried to hide evidence by deleting bet history but the player took the evidence for this, Hhampuz of course you're also giving us a pass on this you're our dirty scumbag right?"


You're simply an evil person. No, I don't make deals with thieves for half of my money. The only reason this is being imposed on me is because, you know, it's internet era, and scamming someone at an overseas distance has no consequences.
I've made enough good decisions in life to be able make a living other than being a scam promoter. On the other hand just perhaps sooner or later you're going to hell with your dirty money, and there might be no other way out...

I'll be honest, I feel like you're somebody who is trying to communicate, and I respect that, because that's what we're supposed to do here, not to promote scams and throw in messages with nonsense talk and merit each other on nonsense talk like a lot of people do here. I also respect your decision and won't be giving you back a red trust for this.

Most of the people who participated in the giveaway opposed the flag and they all got paid. Just check my giveaway thread in the reputation section and you can verify it.

There is nothing bogus, it's just not true that you followed the topic because you're missing the point by a big difference. If you're interested simply check my scam accusation I don't have to explain what I already explained earlier.

Dear PaperWallet,

You have created enough awareness about your alleged FortuneJack scam. I have always kept blind eyes at your posts or allegations because majority of the users here, especially DT1 members do not agree with you.
But I am obliged to ask the following questions;

1. You created a flag and offered an incentive for whoever opposes or supports the flag. I don't think this is wrong. I have seen companies pay for review. This is because many people might read your flag and feel uninterested or unconcerned because they are not directly affected. The incentive will be to encourage participation on a neutral ground.
I am responding accordingly to your statement
PaperWallet, if this is true, your allegation should now be for $20k and not for $120k. Or is there something bogus I'm missing?

Finally, I saw FJ response to you on the grounds of T&C. Your case should be if such terms were made before or after you won your alleged $120k.

This is the kind of reputation damage that comes from joining such an "offer".

PaperWallet, I believe you acted in bad faith in your dispute with FJ but I also believe that everyone has a right to bring up such disputes and should not be penalized for doing so, although "penalizing" a throwaway account is moot anyway. But I wouldn't red-trust you for bringing up a dispute.

I would - and did - red-trust you for paying to subvert/abuse the trust system. While there might be some grey areas in how some people "promote" their disputes to get support for flags, offering money is not grey IMO. You can talk all you want about the payment not being dependent on outcome etc but your demeanor in that thread and even here shows that you wanted to gain support, or at best to stir more shit up.

Others may disagree that bringing money into the trust system is a big deal, and that's fine (the disagreement; not the money). While I appreciate opinions about my trust feedback I'm extremely unlikely to change it unless underlying facts turn out to be incorrect. The facts as stated in the feedback I posted for you are correct. It is not about your "views" as you disingenuously claim in the title of your thread.

I was considering red-trusting anyone who supported/opposed the flag with knowledge that you're paying for that but I'll probably just tilde them instead.

Says a bellyacher who moaned about how people ignored the useless false flag he created and even went on to an extent of abusing the trust system by paying a 10mBTC just to get reactions to his flag  

Get your shit together.

You instantly dismiss anyone who does not support your "cause" right away as "nonsense talkers" or "paid promoters". How can you ever expect to be taken seriously when you are so incredibly set in your ways while refusing to listen to anyone else?

Fact 1) You "claim" to have been scammed for $120k.
Fact 2) You got a public response from FJ regarding the matter showing that you in fact had won $100k which was the limit for identical bets.
Fact 3) You twist the story and start calling FJ scammers wherever you go.
Fact 4) You create a bogus flag which the community obviously does not agree with since the only support you have been able to garner for it is of disgruntled gamblers who have been talking shit about FJ for years at this point.

YOU are unable to understand/respect how flags, ToS, contracts etc. work and you have the gall to come here and ask if this is how the trust feedback system is supposed to work?

Talk shit - get hit. How about you just take your $100k and fuck off as you seemingly bring nothing of value to this forum.

OP, I remember your giveaway thing and thought it was a bit weird at the time--and I also suspected it might get you into hot water, since it involves both the trust system and exchanging of crypto.  Those two things generally never go together in a good way.

But the feedback you got because of your statements about Fortunejack don't warrant negative trust IMO.  Granted, I haven't checked into the validity of what you wrote, but I kind of expect more from a member like Hhampuz and wouldn't have expected a feedback like the one he gave you.  His and suchmoon's were the two that showed up as being trusted when I looked at your feedback page.  Anyway, just like every other case of contested feedback that I've commented on in the past seven years, there's nothing I or the community can do to help you out (and I'm pretty sure you know that).

Don't know how much you care about all those negs you got, but maybe with time you can at least convince some of the DT members to remove them.  I've got a custom trust list and don't follow all the DT updates, so I have no idea who those members are.  Good luck to you.

Just ignore the second half of my post, because it's easier to remain a petulant brat than it is to behave like an adult.

Lol you're valuing yourself too much, who the hell cares.


Of course, of course, not scammed, at all. If you think you're helping fortunejack, you're mistaken. We will see.

That's disingenuous and you know it.  A more accurate description would be that you violated their TOS and weren't allowed to keep your ill-gotten winnings.  You're failing to mention that you were given a refund for your deposits.  That's not the same thing as getting scammed.

Nonetheless, as for the two red tags you have; I wouldn't have left either of them myself, but I don't believe either are particularly inaccurate.  If you feel they're unjustified, I suggest you make an appeal to the better nature of both individuals (it's been my experience that both are good natured people) and they may decide to remove them.

So we are now nonsense talkers because we didn't agree with what you did?

You made a post looking for opinions on whether your actions were ok or not, and I insist what you did is not different from buying trust.
In any way, I opposed the flag earlier on, I hope that makes you feel better.

Next time, if you feel like you don't want people's opinions, then just don't post at all instead of being a cry baby around here.


And here is what I said.

Here we go, as I predicted in my OP, 4 professional nonsense talkers and scam promoters immediately pop up to throw in their messages.

Here's what I said about the giveaway that I've done and already paid out:

And here's the first one to pop up:

Second genius:

Third popup:

4th medal:

How funny is that?


Don't worry about me reading, if you read their terms and conditions like you misread my 2 sentences in the OP, you're in here for an excellent argument lol


In any case, thank you @Loyce for coming in here and straightening things a little bit, and you've given me the answer to my original question.

Haha, this guy is really hilarious. Pay to people just to react to his flag, opposers got paid in cursed coin, lol. At least, you have to give him the credit for trying to make a scene. But I think trying to influence people just for them to go to cast their vote or react to a flag in this case, can this still be counted as shifting votes to his side? Since it makes people feel in debt to him, more likely to side with him on the matter? Or maybe just a vicious way for him to get back by making the negative feedback/flag system looks like a joke.

He does make me want to know the matter between him and Fortunejack. How it could escalate to the point he did things like this.

I don't agree with either of the 2 negative feedbacks you've received, but it's also not one of those cases where I would suggest/ask/recommend to remove them.

To be fair: OP asked for people to Support or Oppose his Flag, and he did pay the 10 mBTC (although I didn't check all involved addresses). He added a curse though

It's certainly a first!
For what it's worth: I saw reasons for (and against) Support and Oppose, and didn't vote at all.

Is that how feedback or trust system is supposed to work?

Pay people money to react to a flag?
From what I can see, you are the one trying to abuse the trust system by providing incentives in exchange for reactions. Why would anyone trust a person like you?

On the part where you're going to give money away just to be supported, isn't that bribing already? Do you think that kind of behavior would be okay? I don't think so. That's just a show of effort that you are desperate to have support or something.

One problem is that you're lying. I am sure that you know that the flag was because of the money offered in that so-called giveaway, not because of speaking up.

Then is the problem with that giveaway of yours: I've seen it, I've interpreted it like you see everything like gambling, even the trust somebody deserves (and this is pretty much wrong).
From the feedback you've got, I see it was interpreted also that with your prizes you may have tried to get people support your flag (to get good money, not cursed one, lol). And this is (much) worse.

There is a saying (maybe not in English, but I'll translate) "If two different people tell you that you're drunk, you better go to sleep".
I understand that you may be frustrated, but it's not the entire forum bought up by casinos, no. You should start looking again to the presented facts and the conclusions and see that something is wrong with what you're doing or how you do that.

You want people to support your flag with you paying them? That alone deserves red tag.

There are some sites that are not reputable, like the 1xbit, but Fortunejack has been one of the reputed casino on this forum, there can be misunderstanding while using a betting site, the fault can either be from the casino or the customer. You do not have to offer money for support, just be transparent about what you are saying, if worthy enough to attend too, people will support you if there is a clear evidence.

Your case and his case are completely different, do you demanding DT members to remove their negative trust in your account? No, they're correct. Negative feedback are used to user who high likely want to scam anyone or can't be trusted. The thing is Fortunejack already explained the case and why they seized your money, because you're breaking their rules [1] but you didn't accept that and start act like a victim, while you're not the victim. Any users before using any services should read their TOS and if you failed to do that, you're wrong and Fortunejack is the victim since you're attacking due to your anger.

Another more, you're offering money to support your flag, that's abusing the forum system [2]

---

[1] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.58318691
[2] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/for-the-reputation-of-this-forum-you-have-to-rule-on-this-flag-share-10mbtc-5399713

Hello,
I came across this thread by @edgycorner https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/negative-feedback-for-supporting-a-newbie-on-their-scam-accusation-against-stake-5401642 where he was complaining he got negative feedback for supporting a flag. The story ended him being removing his support for the flag and the negative feedback was removed.

As an example, I myself fell a victim to a scam of one of gambling websites promoted by this forum (fortunejack.com), and got negative feedback for speaking up. I then created a flag and saw there were few people supporting it, so I created a giveaway of 10 mBTC to either support/oppose the flag (right here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/for-the-reputation-of-this-forum-you-have-to-rule-on-this-flag-share-10mbtc-5399713), and got yet another negative feedback for that too! Is this how this feedback is supposed to work? Just asking.

Easy guys, I know some angry casino promoters (some scams, some not scams, more or less) will come here throw in their messages right and left and start meriting each other on their messages, but I'm just asking a question right.