These are not good reasons to leave a red trust on an otherwise productive forum member. Its an overblown response based more in emotion than reason. The first point is a non-issue. You are blowing things out of proportion by equating it with non-trustworthiness. The second point can happen to anybody. Its a continuance of promoting a scam after clear warning signs have been established that should matter. I do not consider Shishir99's actions to be indications of untrustworthiness, nor do most others who have bothered to chime in so far.

I'm not going to ask you to consider removing the red trust on that account in particular. You should want to do it because its the right thing to do.

Sure. Don't trust verify. I have provided dozens of proofs and explained clearly why these users deserve a red trust. If you don't trust me it's ok but you cannot pretend we have to not warning users before they read other suggestions about "hey why escalate so fast - 7 days?" - or "hey have you play to the best tower game - in a scam website?"


I can continue to quote endless the same and same answers that definetely explain why there is a specific trust rating.
Bitcoin is based on evidences, opinions are worth zero But it's more easy provide OPINIONS and SKIPS EVIDENCE AND FACTS.

We have just reached 10 pages of the scam. Despite an entire topic to harrass and defame my person - and not to address the scam accusation - same users involved continue to have "better idea on how to works with scammers".

What is a better, a selection of scam of the pasts, or wait a few weeks for the next scam?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594694.0 scam accusation
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67171394#msg67171394 Links with sister scam casino
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67168369#msg67168369 Links of warnings they was not answering since many days / trust a newbie as "team"
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67171810#msg67171810 4 scams of the last 6 months (all with the same scheme)

While the other tags and flags are debatable, the red tag on Shishir99 is clearly a reactive overreach. Its not necessary; thus it is still a problem.


I just read the whole thread and it appears to be a case of attacking the messenger, who had a very valid message... even if it was delivered annoyingly, and perhaps in direct contradiction with a prior moral stance. Maybe you're right, but the evidence at this point is mostly anecdotal.

Can I read some evidences and not just "in my opinion"?  I have explained why all of these red tag are appropriate. Read just the proofs, after 9 pages of "it's all true" what is "sufficient for you"?

Insufficient you mean that I need to post another 5 scam of the last 12 months and you have also evaluated this scam "live right now" ?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67174787#msg67174787  

Just Asking because I can understand that maybe once there 10 scams "that can be recognized in 2 minutes" someone will say "insufficient" ... why not 15 scams to be scammer? or 20? Or I don't know, how many cards has to peel @yogg to be a scammer? Or cold card, how many hardware need to fail? LOL I love double standards.

Matthew Breetzke is in the team to replace Dewald Brevis and he has performed well whenever he got the opportunity as he scored his second ODI century today and they are building a good bench strength.

Australia is currently batting as if they are targeting well over 350 runs. They just lost their second wicket, and if they play sensible cricket without losing many wickets, then they will easily chase this score with the way they are batting.

I agree with the views expressed; the reasons cited previously are insufficient to support that flag. LM did not intend to breach or harm the contract (the issue arose from negligence) so I oppose that flag.

The same applies to @Shishir99's situation. I do not know @bitbollo, but I would kindly ask him to remove that negative rating.

---

Regarding LM, this is the second case where hasty decision-making has led to such a situation; a "neutral" or "negative" trust rating might be warranted. However, changing your projects management approach—such as delaying release escrow until you have verified that everything is correct—is the right way to shift that negative trust to neutral.

If you had to create a thread to discuss your negative feedback, it would have been more appropriate to focus on that rather than the sarcasm. It seems as though you only created this thread because your feelings and/or ego was hurt by what bitbollo wrote. As for the matter of the tag, if it were me I would have left a neutral at most. Having said that, if bitbollo sees you as a shill for a scammer and has left a negative tag that is his decision and if he faces any consequences in return (trust exclusion or tags) then that is a matter I am sure and he has already contemplated.

I cannot recall engaging with you before (except maybe once or twice very briefly) but keeping that aside, you deserve a lot of credit for creating this thread even though you probably knew you would have to defend yourself against two campaign managers that are well known for helping/supporting each other whenever the need arises.

You had a principle regardless of the amounts of money involved and you took action even though you knew you were going to get some pushback from other members in this thread. I think you deserve a lot of credit for taking action and then for standing by what you believe in regardless of what possible drama were to unfold.

As the situation currently stands, certain campaign managers are taking on any project for the sake of adding it to their portfolio. Clearly Hhampuz and icopress apply due-diligence in ways that others do not, their standard is probably far too high for some others to compete with.

We are not perfect, mistakes can be made and scams might inadvertently be promoted too but strict due-diligence should be applied by campaign managers. Royse777 continued to promote the Sinbad mixer even after I created a thread stating that it was going to be shutdown as authorities had traced millions from another money laundering mixer was used to launch it by the same owner. After Sinbad was seized, mixers were banned from the forum. Had Royse777 cancelled the campaign, maybe mixers would not have been banned at that time. It remains possible that mixers could have been banned at a later date but that does not account for the incompetence and gross negligence shown by Royse777 at the time.

Over 99% of the accounts posting in this forum are only here because want to monetise their accounts via signature campaigns. If other opportunities arose from bounties, contests, competitions and free lucky draws as well as paid participation threads then that would be deemed as a bonus. The vast majority of those campaign participants would not care if they were promoting a scam or not (and would not even stop promoting it even if they were convinced it was a scam). Also, we have no idea how many are farmed accounts and how they are affecting the forum.

Let us not avoid one obvious fact, Royse777 and Little Mouse have nothing bad to state about each other and they seem to aid each other when questions against either one of them are raised. From what it seems,

Thank you all for the warm response! We did not expect this much interest this quickly, and we are glad to see it!

A few people hit a bug in the bot while applying. That is on us. The bug is fixed. Anyone who ran into it already received the application bonus at double the usual size.

A special thank you to julerz12 for the advices he gave us in private. It was very useful!


Yes, of course. Everything is discussed individually. If a member ranks up during a 6-month seat, reviewing the weekly rate is a very logical step.


Thank you for the kind words!

We are happy to reward valid applications and, so far, we do not see how the bonus could be abused. If you see a potential way to abuse it that we may have overlooked, we would appreciate it if you could point it out.

The bonus is our thank-you for the time spent on a proper application.


There is no strict post quota. In the application the applicant puts the activity that is comfortable for them, and that is the number we use. 20 posts per week is only a usual reference, not a mandatory target and not a ceiling.

Pay is per week, not per post. The payout frequency that is comfortable for you is also set in the application.

If more questions piled up, keep them coming. We will answer here.

The bonus have requirement,  It can indeed still be abused, but not for new accounts or those below "Full Member" status.

I think the same.

The $5 bonus can be used for hosting contests with different terms and get better effects than too simply giving away.

What is reason for "gambling requirement forces people to write there" and why is it related to this thread?

Antiswap is an exchanger monitoring site and I see it similar to Bestchange.

That's not really a valid reason to leave a red tag IMO. I don't think anybody is supporting this casino anymore and that's what matters.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5591848.msg67164618#msg67164618
Even he has the courage to argue "that has escalated fasted as light".
I don't know these countries, but I have never seen "lights" fast like 7 days... If even 7 days OF FUNDS STOLEN / PAYMENT NOT MADE (including insult in private and in public) is not enough for opening a scam accusation his judgement can't be trusted.
[/quote]

He was using "fast as light" as a metaphor to describe how quickly the situation escalated between yourself and Little Mouse. I didn't see it as meaning any particular offense. And I don't think he was implying you shouldn't open a scam accusation. On the contrary:


You may take personal offense to this but to everyone else it looks like an earnest attempt to help.

After 9 days "campaign manager" knows they are a scam - just changed name - they are still promoting here. It's evindet that the amount of lies spread by you in this topic are just overwhelming. Thats why with 100 USD I must shut up, right?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67171394#msg67171394 Links with sister scam casino
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67171810#msg67171810 4 scams of the last 6 months (all with the same scheme)

If you check reference there is the evidence that this user has continued to shill/endorse the same casino that was already a rogue scam with 7 days of total absence (delay from deadline).
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5591848.msg67164618#msg67164618
Even he has the courage to argue "that has escalated fasted as light".
I don't know these countries, but I have never seen "lights" fast like 7 days... If even 7 days (including insult) is not enough for opening a scam accusation his judgement can't be trusted.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594694.msg67164879#msg67164879
Once Has been questione why he was just skipping the comments about the scam he decides to harrass me and create even this topic to try to defaming my account - even quote 28 users.Both are actions that doesn't deserve trust.
These morons doesn't realize that there are already investigations in ALL these scams made my SAME PEOPLE.

Imagine there is the scam of "coldcard" and this guy go in topic completely off topic chanting how it works well is hardware...
I don't understand this double standards.There are scam advertised literally 1 each month, by same companies that have already scammed.
Even if pointed out by reputable user (at this point, I don't know why I need to trust "Shishir99" that at best can ask a loan on forum) this is the reaction of community?
Everyone continue to ask proofs and evidences, anyway we have=
- fail of escrow
- trust a newbie that was already a scam company
- insult and offenses despite warning for many days and multiplatform
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594694.0 scam accusation

- continue promotion of the scam "they are the team" that has been absent for just 9 days = they have just changed name, even if he is aware HE IS STILL SHILLING THAT SHIT HERE
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67171394#msg67171394 Links with sister scam casino

- promotion of scams without due diligence (just a quick selection but there are also other, and one is going to scam soon)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67171810#msg67171810 4 scams of the last 6 months (all with the same scheme)

If forum administration, DT, and admin consider the same "quality" of user having these coackroaches posting scam and insulting please go ahead with those account and add them to your trust list.

Now wait a minute. This is not the type of issue that should be responded to hastily. Its the type where emotions are running high and after the dust settles, people often come to their senses and correct their mistakes. I think Bitbollo's negative trust on you is wrong but I'm giving him time to demonstrate some reasonableness.


There's more to it than that. This frogbet account (and casino) is shady AF. They haven't been online in about 6 days... Its not because they are "too busy" to respond, its because they got outed as scammers earlier than intended.

And it is a problem if campaign managers repeatedly endorse scam products/services. "I couldn't have known they would scam" is a poor excuse which reflects a lack of proper judgment. LM should definitely be more selective and avoid introducing scams to the community for their own benefit.

Having said that, bitbollo's actions are overkill for this particular Scam Accusation, especially the red tag on Shishir99. I supported the flag on frogbet and opposed the flag on Little Mouse. I'm hoping bitbollo will reconsider his stance and work to de-escalate the issue rather than leaving things fractured.

Admit mistake?
What did you mean?
He has continued to endorse still nowadays that shit like any normal casino despite they have a domain going to expiry in MARCH 2027 and are already linked with a well known scam!
They are the same SCAMMERS ! Just have changed name. This for you means admit a mistake? Endorse them because they are scammers but with a new name?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67171394#msg67171394

"LOL"

Anyone can check how many issues as arised during the last month in this forum . The over reaction - violent and towards my person - is just the cherry on the top.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67171394#msg67171394

You can insult me ​​and violate the logic of forum users as long as you want. This forum is a public forum.
Outsiders will also read these conversations. Who knows if there are any legal complaints? Some investigations?

These are all sites that have committed crimes. Some of them are the same owners that here with a different name - frogbet - luckyanon.
Yes, this last one, this one that "must be forgiven," is another scam site.

You may not realize how burdensome it is to have sponsored all these scams, but okay, we're only talking about criminal offenses, people who have lost a lot of money.

The only interesting thing is to remove that flag!

LOL they continue to get unpolite and upolite continuing to repeat the same things over and over.

He has just a week to realize they are scam and they was not making a payment. This has been already discussed and verified in the scam accusation.
Despite they are a well known group of scammers he has trusted for all of this time, as mentioned, they regeristed as newbie in August. There are more than 30 messages in these days to highlight the risk of the scam and he has not making nothing.
I continue to answer not because you had to feel important, but the naive way in how you have confirmed ALL THE SCAM ATTEMPT AND BEHAVIOUS IS SELF EXPLANATORY OF THE QUALITY OF THE ACCOUNT.


As you can see in previous posts has been utterly discussed that the problem would not be "100 USD". After everyyear I have donated thousands of dollars with freebies and other activities continue to insist on this point it's like we are talking with a broken computer.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594694.0 scam accusation
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67168369#msg67168369 Links of warnings they was not answering since many days / trust a newbie as "team"
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67171394#msg67171394 Links with sister scam casino
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67171810#msg67171810 5 scams of the last 6 months (all with the same scheme)

Looks like there is no brain inside your head. It's full of shit.
Did he start the campaigns knowing the company is a scam? Or did they turn into a scam later? Which one?
Why blame the campaign manager if the 2nd one is the truth? If you do so, why not other managers?

Why did you ignore my previous post?
Don't you have any valid arguments? Oh grow up kid.

Moderators, and then people complains about off topic and the forum become a pure garbage yep?
For how many days these people should be allowed to post completely non sense accusations/off topic/out of context?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594694.0 scam accusation
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67168369#msg67168369 Links of warnings they was not answering since many days / trust a newbie as "team"
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67171394#msg67171394 Links with sister scam casino

Here there are other proofs for the DT network but casually you have forget to comment.
The same company behind FROGBET was behing another SCAM CALLED LUCKYANON and GUESS WHO WAS ENDORSING THEM?

You are ignoring the scam that they made with the same company right? you continue to deny and to support ALL EVIDENCES.
Luckily there is a Trust system and yours red tag are completely appropriate.

I have shared all the details with you, including the order ID and USDC wallet address, so you should be able to see everything. At first, they told me that the funds were being held by KuCoin, but KuCoin said they do not have them. My funds are now in their hands. Please help me resolve this situation.

Thanks for mentioning this.

It's the same lizex, I confirm because Lixex reached to me an hour ago and told me about this.
@mabji1 can you provide me the transaction ID via PM if you are not comfortable to share it in public?

Apologies for the bad words that I used last night, bitbollo
You need to stop insulting people and be usual. This is not the usual bitbollo community knows.


Honestly, it's too hard to stay calm when someone continuously insults you for being neutral and for your opinion. The quoted post was my initial response to his scam accusation thread, and he left me a negative feedback right away after this post.


As for the entire case, here is what happened.

As bitbollo said, he made a deposit; the casino applied a bonus automatically with his deposit (with huge 100x wagering requirements). Then bitbollo went to cancel the bonus. But after cancelling it, his balance became zero. This is when the issue started, and their support gave him a 24-hour time frame. However, it's been a week, but they haven't credited the missing funds (his initial deposit). This is one of the reasons he is frustrated (anyone would be).

Additionally, his review campaign reward wasn't credited either. Little Mouse argued that he is responsible for the review contest reward, but not for the bonus issue that happened with Frogbet. At that point, their arguments got heated. I don't think $50 is anything to a campaign manager who is holding a large amount of funds for the campaigns he is running. As Little Mouse said, he has been asking Frogbet to resolve that, which is why he waited. $50 is too small to ruin his own reputation. He cannot be a scammer because of a casino's laziness, delayed communication, or whatever reason they didn't credit.

When I saw the thread and the negative feedback, I asked them to take a break, sit together, have some coffee, and clean up the mess.
I got numerous insults and accusations and the negative feedback in return.

Both of you are replying to quotes taken out of context.  ONE example:

I did assume that you are a guy known for spamming but everyone here ignored it as you were contributing. I thank my instincts and I can now see a red tag telling the same. You keep on doing your work of spamming and creating a myth of someone responsible to the community. Your reply is highly respectable. I removed you only from my ignore list as I wanted to reply. You are back on that list and please do not spam this thread if you do not have a slight understanding what you are writing, just like Dying something from your local board.

If you expose forum you get heavily offended and threaten by some sock puppets that has quoted 28 USERS!
I would just reply one time with all the important crucial details missing....
Likewise that funds was expected to be provided with a deadline of 24 hours. These funds have been escrowed. After 7 days and many messages in private and in forum the campaign manager decide to send back forum to escrow and confirmed (sending immediately offense) that I was going to not pay me!
You can read the full scam accusation for the full story.

This user @OP has posted one time in the main topic of this casino "like everything was normal".
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5591848.msg67164618#msg67164618

Then immediately has pointed out in scam accusation topic complaining about "hey calm down, why escalate fast as light" (---> 7 days no answers from deadline and HEY WHY SO FAST)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594694.msg67164766#msg67164766

I would not answer to the other offense like "help him". This casino it's a confirmed scam, what it should be supposed the right term to "not escalated faster than light"?

This is a very offensive topic by itself - denigratory of my reputation.
I hope that moderator would take action banning this account also for a stalker approach by quoting for nonsense 28 users.

So, his majesty bitbollo got scammed by frogbet, the campaign manager was not able to help him yet in getting his funds back. Then he created a scam accusation thread here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594694.0

I am pretty active in the scam accusation board, and I saw bitbollo also posted on frogbet thread yesterday that he would open a scam accusation later. I was waiting for it. After checking the thread today, I noticed that he already left a negative feedback to Little Mouse and they had heated arguments and both of them were rude in their conversation.

Since I also participated in Frogbet review campaign, I have shared my experience and posted a friendly suggestion for both bitbollo and Little Mouse. I am quoting myself here -


However, his majesty bitbollo thinks asking them to take a break and coming back was rude, and he claims I became a shill of this casino because of this post.
He left negative feedback on my profile saying this;


He called me a spammer, scammer, suckpuppet, shill and others. So, I had to mention the people who trust him to check the feedback and help him understanding if he is on the right path. After that, his majesty added another feedback -
BTW, he deleted the first feedback, and then added back after a few minutes.
I think your friend bitbollo needs help. Please help him!

You continue to spread off topic and lies comment on my person - supporting a scam make of you a scammer. I had posted clearly here reference.
In the topic of the scam you post immediately a comment like "it was everything normal".
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5591848.msg67164618#msg67164618

Then you can come here complaining that "this has escaleted FAST AS LIGHT". 7 days of total absence? 7 days of continue positive review?
Not addressing this behaviours make of you a scammer thats all.
The two negative trusts are completely appropriate. You defended the scam casino and scam campaign manager pointing out non-sense argument.
Since you have been also a kind of stalker, by quoting 28 users of the forum a red trust is pretty appropriate.

Thanks for all of the offenses. You support a scam casino saying that "has escaleted too fast"
Too fast? Go to BARK ON ANOTHER PLACE!

 You deserve a red trust and anyone must be aware that you are a shill / sock puppet. Its evident you come here to spread your shit.

You can look the full post of your crappy comment here. Now that you have quoted and showed how retard you are, did you feel better scammer?
Have you missed your

Thanks for the reply and I understand that you are a busy person. My intention was never to force the product, but only to get feedback from you, as you have been handling the AI spam within this forum for a long time. I do not want to replace the system nor do I want to change it. I need to know only if my detector is fit to fight this competitive space with other detectors as you have the expertise and knowledge of using them. If you think that my detector is fit or can be considered to be one on that list then I will be happy and I will know that I am moving in the right direction how to make it more sturdy and robust with new updates.

My reply to that guy was direct because I do not think writing anything just for the sake of writing is justified when the discussion is about the free tool that I have built & my urge to seek your feedback.

All the tools that are listed on my website are privacy focused. Nothing stays on the server side as everything is stored and runs using the browser. For an AI detection tool like mine, it will get downloaded onto the browser cache and it will use the user's system resources to run itself. What I can do here is that I can give the choice to the user to use both the AIs or only one.

I do not want to force my product, but I was seeking feedback like yours on this thread. The user you were referring to does not have any idea why and what I was looking for as he might have not checked the previous chats of mine. That is the reason I gave a direct reply to him and he is on my ignore list. 

You are acting more and more delusional and qualifying yourself
I think that the action to quote /posting 28 username is a clear spam.
This is like public shame/harrassing - since you are tagging all people that I know (many of these also in real life).
I would point out this also to moderator of the section - @Cyrus - I would hope also you get definetely banned for being such rude and non-sense.

After 7 days that an issue has not been addressed there is nothing to calm down. This is impressive rude!
Users get scammed and you blink right? 
Now you are defending casually the same account that have most merit? Why he doesn't deserve a negative trust?
What are the proofs, you suckpuppet, for defending this users?
He has violated agreemeent not payng review? YES
He has not addressed immediately AFTER 24 hours THE MISSING FUNDS - CONTINUING TO PROMOTE A SCAM ? YES
He has been not able to manage funds/relative escrow? YES
He has been immediately aggressive and offensive? YES

You are just a sockpuppet posting nonsense about this casino and this scammer user. You had just to go to bark in another topic.

Stop explaining this bullshit to me. I don't have anything to do with whether they are a scam or fuck. I never said Frogbet is not a scam, or Frogbet is a scam. My initial post was not about Frogbet. It was about the campaign manager Little Mouse being scammer.

Let me bold it for you -


You need to re-read the post. I don't defend casinos or any service even if I participate in their campaign. I have been in the Betpanda and Chips.gg campaign, and I criticized them a lot while I was in their campaign. How many of you crticize the platform while you are in their campaign?

So "calm down" is rude? On which planet your majestry? My post was in a friendly tone for both of you. But you took it negatively. English isn't my first language, still I don't think "calm down" is rude.

Shishir99 - I would not deal with any sockpuppet/shill account.
Not your key not your coins. If an issue planned to be resolved in 24 hours is not addressed this means there is a scam.
Also it's evident there was after some days still positive feedback by Little Mouse - these are proofs. It's plenty of proof of completely negligence and support of scam.
You have been definetely rude to say "calm down" since there are anough days to "calm down" "lately" "soon" "the team" and other shit.
There is nothing more to speak, once users defend scam service/casino deserve only a red trust.
Please go to rant on another topic now.

Again? I need to calm? You need to speak politely and now go to rant in another topic.
This issue was planned to be resolved in less than 24 hours. After 7 days you are just supporting a scam.
You have no absolutely right to use any word to judge my person. It qualifiy all of your bunch of crocks... casually top merit profile?
casually enrolled where? AH!
Have you seen fake statement shill/shitposter in this scam accusation?
There is nothing aggressive only pure truth of a scammer and a scam promotion system exposed.

Of course you have nothing to engage. Your contribution to forum is already negative by supporting and defending such low value of service/users.
You deserve a red trust because you post also non-sense content. I told you very clear, you had to understand in full: please go to bark in another topic.

Just a few words for you, bitbollo.
You need to calm down and then come back again. There is no need to rush and take things personally. By saying it was escalated fast, I meant the scam accusation thread. I was actually waiting for your scam accusation after seeing your post in the Frogbet thread, and I even responded.


You seem too aggressive right now. So, I won't engage with this discussion anymore, and there is no point in telling you if I am a low-quality shitposter or an elite poster who is in the top 10% of active posters. I have posted my unbiased opinion, and you decided to tag my account. Well, that is up to you 
I will let you decide what to do. It was a friendly suggestion the last time, and I would say this again: Take a break. Sit together, and I am sure this will be solved.

This user has start to insult immediately after confirming his incompetence. Its not a insult say he is a scammer. The deadline was 24 hours.
Waiting 7 days is not enough right? Not be able to address a review is not enough right? Not be able to manage properly funds escrowed was not enough right?
Not able to address a scam accusation and trust as "TEAM" a casino that was scamming deposit was not enough right?

It's a fact that he has supported a scammer and it's a fact that this casino turned in a scam.

Since you are defending both behaviour and reputation you can definetely be defined an user that support a scam casino and an user that has clearly violated an agreement according a written agreement.

It's amazing how we can respond to some of the seemingly familiar habits and writing styles of people. Sometimes, without seeing a person, his nature is so acutely felt. I've seen the same thing in TokenTikas posts.😆

I think your tool is too heavy to use Bro, 2.8GB of RAM should be able to unlock more web AI Detectors.
I'm not sure users who use a PC or Laptop that has limited RAM will use your AI Detector.

What's more, some of the AI Detectors in the OP are still working fine, so I agree with Shishir99, you don't need to force it. If you continue to improve your tools and can reduce the RAM needed to unlock your tools, I'm sure your tools will be needed by this community as well.

nutella man, take me by the hand

Shishir99 has been contributing to this thread since 2022. Your first post here was to announce your AI detector. Before I make any incorrect assumptions, maybe you can help me understand your end goal: do you want us to replace our current system with your detector, or do you want us to add it to the list of detectors we are using?

I do understand it, and I think you are trying to hack into a discussion where your expertise is not required. Please put me on your ignore list. I have already done it. Stop! It is high time you did it.

I have to say that it was somewhat a challenge to fully wager at least $250 without losing the principal or at least preserving it.

And about losing, I've been there. Kept rage betting until it the fat 0 zero comes because I simply wanted my original wager back 😅

But some Ori games did help, like the Multiplier Mines. You might lose some from the original bets but at least it's not always total loss if played with moderate risk.

No, it’s not. It’s only works sometimes or not at all , and even image links don’t guarantee to show and image

I posted this two days ago, images never loaded and links did not show images


Talkimg way to go (Imgur has become almost entirely utterly useless, feature by feature has stopped working over the years..whomever runs that company is a fn idiot).

At least you still manage to have another experience playing on their website. It's better to think this way as one of the opportunities to explore and experience the casino. In this way, even if you end up losing all of your balance, you won't regret this action.

So, the next time you receive a reward, you will know already on how to handle it. You might be able to win or stop and withdraw immediately once you feel that the same fate as before might happen again if you continue.

First reward is actually meant to give as a learning experience.

Hmm, when you first cashed out the review deposit (5x wager), was there any profit?

Appreciate your supportive words, Shishir99.

To clarify: I never expected this forum thread to directly force Binance's hand. The sole purpose of documenting everything here on Bitcointalk is to create an immutable, public audit trail of the breach that Binance cannot delete or edit—ensuring future users and researchers see exactly how compliance is handled when things go wrong.

As for the timeline: Regulatory enforcement processes are never fast, but speed is secondary to accountability.

The most critical milestone has already been reached: Case #00403511 is no longer an internal dispute within Binance's black box. The Abu Dhabi FSRA has officially served a formal request for information to Binance, placing the entire burden of proof directly on their compliance department.

I am now maintaining dynamic silence while the regulator conducts its formal material assessment.

Thank you to everyone who followed and contributed to this thread. I will post the next update the moment the FSRA provides their findings or Binance responds to the official inquiry.

They had a review campaign sometime back, managed by Royse

[LOCK] Lizex.io Review Campaign | Your Opinion Matters | Reward Up To $60

সবগুলো এক এক টা জমিদার। জমিদারের বাচ্চাদের বৃষ্টিবাদলের দিনে কাদা পাড়ায়ে আসতে কষ্ট হয়, এজন্য অফিসে বসেই বিল বানায়। বিশ্বাস করেন ভাই আমার জীবনে ৩০০ ইউনিটের উপরে যায় না, কপাল খারাপ থাকলে ম্যাক্সিমাম ৪০০ ইউনিট! কিন্তু এমাসে আসলে ৫১০ সামথিং। লাইক হোয়াদদাফাক! জমিদারগুলো সারাবছর মিটার দেখে না, আর বছর শেষে সমন্বয়ের নামে গ্রাহকের পুটকি মারে।

সোলারে আমারও যাওয়ার খুব ইচ্ছা। তবে ইনিশিয়াল খরচ নাকি ব্যাপক। দেখি কি করা যায়। লিটিল মাউস ভাইয়ের সোলার সিস্টেম আছে। ওনার কাছ থেকে আইডিয়া নিয়ে দেখতে হবে, আর অল্প অল্প করে টাকা জমাতে হবে সোলারের জন্য!

---

বিন্দিয়ান ভেভোলপার? ওকে আমি আগেই বাদ!

কাউন্ট মি আউট!

I submitted my complete, official bank statement right inside the appeal chat proving zero funds ever entered my bank account (LE XUAN HUNG).

The buyer did not pay me. They transferred money to a random third-party named JI PENGFEI, then submitted that third-party receipt as proof.

Despite my verified KYC name being LE XUAN HUNG and my bank statement showing 0 fiat received, Binance Support accepted a transfer receipt made out to a completely unrelated person (JI PENGFEI). They bypassed their own mandatory "Zero-Tolerance Anti-Third-Party" rule and manually released my 2,839.93 USDT to the buyer.

When I demanded the technical audit logs for why they authorized a release based on a third-party payment receipt, they unilaterally closed the ticket citing "internal confidentiality."

That is why this isn't just gross negligence—it is a total compliance collapse.

The Abu Dhabi FSRA is now investigating this exact transaction under Case #00403511 and has issued a formal request for information to Binance. They will have to explain to the regulator why they handed my crypto to a buyer who paid a third party instead of the verified seller.