Quote from: dooglus on April 06, 2016, 07:00:36 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 06, 2016, 06:59:28 AM

It is very difficult to put a dollar figure on the amount of money that was stolen as a result of dooglus's help (only in relation to his coding of a ponzi script) because it is not public information when someone uses his script.

I keep telling you. I don't and didn't code a Ponzi script. I removed some broken code from an existing Ponzi script.

What you are saying you did and what I am saying you did are one and the same. You took a ponzi code, made one or more changes to it and after said changes the ponzi script was better.

Quote from: dooglus on April 06, 2016, 07:00:36 PM

The correct answer to the question "How much did dooglus steal?" is "nothing at all". But don't let that get in the way of your story telling.

You don't need to be the one who received the money in order for you to have helped third parties steal from others.

Quote from: dooglus on April 06, 2016, 07:00:36 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 06, 2016, 06:59:28 AM

3 - IIRC, dooglus had made roughly 100BTC in profit between gambling at dicebitco.in and investing in their bankroll. This is when they were cheating their high rollers and stealing from their bankroll investors.

IIRC it was much less than that. I had a couple of good runs using Martingale betting but hit the inevitable losing streaks that put an end to it. Whether I won or lost doesn't seem to be relevant to whether I'm a scammer however, so what's your point? And I didn't play on their site once it came out that they were cheating their players. Why would I?

It looks like the amount was actually closer to 35BTC, however the fact remains that you won over $15,000 on a site that was cheating highrollers. The size of bets that you were making would reasonably qualify you to be a high roller. The reason why they were able to steal so much money from others was because you were promoting it so heavily and gave them positive trust. You were also actively telling people that you think they should gamble at dicebitco.in (by your own description) which gave them an additional air of legitimacy.

Quote from: dooglus on April 06, 2016, 07:00:36 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 06, 2016, 06:59:28 AM

4 - Dooglus was downplaying the possibility of the operators of dicebitco.in being scammers up until very shortly before it was revealed they were scamming

This is completely false. I always said that I didn't know who they were and so had no way of knowing whether they were scammers or not. I was active in outing their scamming when Finile (was that his name?) first spotted the evidence.

I disagree. Someone posted in the dicebitco.in thread a concern that you were promoting a dice site that popped out of nowhere and whose owners were unknown, to which dicebitco.in responded to but you did not despite responding to several other posts around that same time.

You were also not active in outing dicebitco.in as being scammers as you were initially (url=http://archive.is/NWf4V]archive[/url] defending them.

Quote from: KingOfSports on September 06, 2014, 12:22:39 AM

Quote from: dooglus on September 05, 2014, 05:33:46 PM

Quote from: sherbyspark on September 05, 2014, 04:39:07 PM

I was just looking at my deposit address on the blockchain, and noticed that the amount was transferred to the address of https://btcgains.com/ central address. How is that site related to dicebitco?

If you think of it as "your" deposit address, you're probably going to make wrong assumptions. The address is owned by the site, and the coins you send to it can be used however they like. Most likely they were used to fund some other user's withdrawal.

The only thing that makes it "yours" is that coins sent to it are credited to your account on the site. After that, the coins may move to cold storage, but most likely they will be sent to a different player when he requests a withdrawal.

What i mean dooglus is does anyone know who this guy is or could he simply run off with currently 3,360,000 USD equiv roughly and no one know? This guy doesn't seem to have much previous trust to creating the site.

archive

Quote from: dooglus on April 06, 2016, 07:00:36 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 06, 2016, 06:59:28 AM

Quote from: dooglus on March 29, 2016, 05:35:23 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on March 29, 2016, 06:59:09 AM

dooglus has a very long history of profiting from when other people have been scammed to the point of tens of thousands of dollars, and the amount of money stolen as a result of these scams is to the tune of millions of dollars.

I was lucky not to be scammed myself by those scammers,

Lucky enough so that you were always able to withdraw just before the operators decided to run away with every one's money.

In both cases there were warning signs. dicebitco.in were caught skipping bets, and dice.ninja stopped showing proof of solvency via their cold wallet. I posted about both of these things and withdrew my coins.

And you were promoting the fact that you had withdrew your coins the same way that you were promoting the fact that you had a significant amount of bitcoin deposited with them previously, yes? When dicebitco.in announced in their changelog that they were going to require 2fa in order to divest, you pointed out that this might be undesirable to bankroll investors along with you many other bug reports, yes? (<-- many of the people that dicebitco.in was able to steal from had their 2fa codes/devices locked away in places that were inaccessible during the weekend -- eg. bank safe deposit box -- and considering that the owners of dicebitco.in were all but certainly gambling with an alt account knowing the server seed at a time when roughly zero banks were open, Sunday evening/very early Monday morning -- the first report of mateo winning big was at ~12:30 AM GMT September 8 2014 -- anyone who stored their f2a code off site more or less was unable to divest from their bankroll, yes?

Quote from: dooglus on April 06, 2016, 07:00:36 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 06, 2016, 06:59:28 AM

Quote from: dooglus on March 29, 2016, 05:35:23 PM

yet you twist the reality to try to make it look as if I was somehow to blame.

Or had advance knowledge of the scam, yet pushed (and advertised) the sites anyway. But this is off topic in this thread, it can be discussed in more detail in Chapter 3

I had no advance knowledge. You have no evidence that I had any advance knowledge, and yet keep insinuating that I did.

For a brief time I advertised a couple of sites that appeared to be running an honest service. Later, there were warning signs that they might not be honest. I withdrew my coins and warned people about the sites.

Are you sure about this? I am not so sure

Quote from: dooglus on April 06, 2016, 07:00:36 PM

How does any of that mesh with your theory that I was somehow complicit in the scams? It would make no sense for me to post anything negative about the sites if I was "in on" the scams.

You were defending dicebitco.in after it was revealed that they were skipping rolls. Once both of the sites had sufficient amounts of others' BTC it really did not matter what you posted one way or another.

Quote from: dooglus on April 06, 2016, 07:00:36 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 06, 2016, 06:59:28 AM

You knew that Kyle (the operator of the CLAM based ponzi) had stolen 25BTC from investors of his ICO/IPO

As I understand it he has paid the majority of his debt back and is working to pay back the rest. He strikes me as a good guy with some problems, trying to make things right.

I am not sure why you believe that. Even if this was true, you were helping him get into the exact same situation that resulted in him stealing 25BTC of other people's money.

Quote from: dooglus on April 06, 2016, 07:00:36 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 06, 2016, 06:59:28 AM

Your own negative trust rating against Kyle says that he should not be trusted with other people's money/coins
You knew that Kyle was the person running the CLAM based ponzi
The CLAM based ponzi would need to be trusted with player's CLAMs in order to operate
When you became aware that the operator of this CLAM based ponzi was Kyle, you actively chose not to warn others not to trust this person
Instead of warning others not to trust Kyle, you instead helped him potentially become trusted with more of other people's money via helping edit the code of the ponzi script he was using

I don't think it's a good idea for him to hold other people's money. He has shown in the past that he can't be trusted with it, and I'm not convinced that he wouldn't make the same mistake again in the future. Maybe he learned his lesson but I wouldn't be sure of it.

So you admit that he should not be holding other people's money, yet you helped him hold more of other people's money, and when you were aware that he was trying to hold other people's money under an alternate account/identity you did not warn anyone.

Quote from: dooglus on April 06, 2016, 07:00:36 PM

But despite that, the fact remains that he was indeed running a Ponzi scheme, and he was using a crappy open source PHP script to do it. The script had paid the first few players out twice each by mistake, and he had no idea why. He asked for my help in fixing the script and I gave it. I posted that I didn't think it was a good idea to be running the scheme, and that the staking rewards wouldn't pay for the returns. Having the script continue paying out incorrectly would be more likely to lead to the scheme defaulting than having it work right and so I decided to take a look at the script. After seeing how poorly coded it was I gave up and recommended he just stop using it.

At the end of the day you still helped improve a script designed to run a ponzi. This is a script that is designed to help someone hold other people's money. And at the end of the day, it is a script that is going to be used to help people steal other people's money.

Quote from: suchmoon on April 06, 2016, 08:27:32 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 06, 2016, 06:59:28 AM

Quote from: suchmoon on March 29, 2016, 03:24:39 PM

One should not value their position in DT more than exposing a scammer. Would you disagree?

I do agree that one should not value their position in the DT network more then exposing a scammer, but that does not mean that is how others value their own position in the DT network. I was speaking about how I believe other people are thinking, not how I am thinking myself.

Sounds like a long-winded equivalent of "I made it up". Would you consider now the possibility that the lack of support for your accusations is being caused not by this "fear" but perhaps by the tenuous nature of said accusations?

No. I was told specifically that I should consider removing my negative rating against dooglus in order to be added back into the DT network by one of the people who are very liberal of the negative ratings they give. There is also the reputation that CITM got for being the essential cause of negative trust whenever anyone talked about him.

Quote from: redacted date=1456048098

What I guess is happening:

He does want to add you in his trust list. But is either under pressure from other DT members, or himself thinks that if he adds you in his trust list, two of the "trusted members" Vod and dooglus will have a neg which will create unnecessary drama, which will come down to him adding you to his trust list.

Try removing those feedbacks and put subtle hints such as(but not limited to) PMs or Personal text pointing out that you have removed them.

Quote from: dogie on April 22, 2016, 06:35:32 PM

There are pros and cons for it being public. For example discussing CiTM in the public before he was overthrown got you disavowed from DT and negative trusted. People can be unwilling to speak out at their own risk and also propagates people using smurfs.

Quote from: suchmoon on April 06, 2016, 08:27:32 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 06, 2016, 06:59:28 AM

4 - Dooglus was downplaying the possibility of the operators of dicebitco.in being scammers up until very shortly before it was revealed they were scamming

I was hanging out around dicebitco.in at that time and I know this to be the opposite of truth, to put it mildly. Dooglus was one of the few consistently warning about the dangers of these anonymous dice sites. Save me a lot of aggravation and some coins too.

I don't think you have any examples of this. Dooglus posted exactly two times about potential risks with trusting coins with a anon dice site operator, the first one was him posting an email asking to hold the private keys to their cold storage along with their server seeds, however he was simultaneously posting at the time that he was trusting them with 50BTC+ in their bankroll. The second time was something along the lines of "oops I accidentally sent these guys whose identities I don't know 100BTC of my money, so I tried to withdraw it all, but they sent it to me immediately after I attempted to withdraw it so I will send 50BTC back to their site".

Quote from: suchmoon on April 06, 2016, 08:27:32 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on April 06, 2016, 06:59:28 AM

Quote from: dooglus on September 05, 2014, 04:34:23 PM

Quote from: KingOfSports on September 05, 2014, 04:25:46 PM

Worried here this is going to one day be like everydice. Does anyone know the admin's identity or know their rep is as significant as Dooglus's was when he created Just-Dice?

EveryDice refunded everyone in full I believe.

Why would you worry about that?

archive

"Why would you worry about [this being like the other site that refunded everyone]?"

Where do you see a problem with that statement?

Maybe I was unclear when I posted that quote. That person replied to dooglus clarifying his concern that anon people are being trusted with $3+ million dollars as a result of dooglus's promotions, however dooglus did not respond to this concern in any way despite being very active in that thread and posting in the same page (multiple times) after that post was written.

Quote from: allyouracid on April 07, 2016, 08:38:49 AM

A little off topic: in 2013-14, I lost quite a fuckton of money on just-dice.com. At first, I was mad at the website, its creator and everything. Now who's to blame, just-dice.com (or any other website I would have used if just-dice wasn't there) or me?
I realized that it was solely my mistake. Learned an expensive lesson, which is still very present in my mind, and I consider it valuable, because that former mistake protects me from making that very same mistake again.

Unless you are saying that dooglus/Just-Dice was cheating you when you lost your money then the comparison is not the same. If you were not cheated when you had your gambling losses then the results of each of your rolls were predetermined and your loosing bets would have been winning bets had you chosen "high" instead of "low" (or visa versa, whichever would have applied). What is the case with a ponzi on the other hand, is that there are certain circumstances in which a player should win, however the operator decides to run away with players' money, in other words the player looses when they "should have" won. The reason why this is so prevalent in happening is because of the fact that ponzi operators almost always have nearly zero prior reputation and ponzis are designed to hold an exponentially larger amount of others' money over a very short period of time.

Quote from: allyouracid on April 07, 2016, 08:38:49 AM

Your logic is seriously flawed, dude.
Contributing to Open Source is a good thing, and if I were to partake in a ponzi scheme, I'd definitely prefer one which is open source, so I can see what the code does.

The players do not see the code in any way. It is only the operators that have anything to do with the code. The code is run entirely behind the scenes.

Quote from: allyouracid on April 07, 2016, 08:38:49 AM

And when I see experienced coders contributing / fixing errors, I'd feel even better using it, because it increases chances that eventual payouts go to the address they're supposed to.

Except when the operators decide to simply send money to their own btc address stealing all the money that the players trusted the operator with

Quote from: allyouracid on April 07, 2016, 08:38:49 AM

Not the script itself makes it a scam.

No, it just helps scammers get more of other people's money.

Quote from: allyouracid on April 07, 2016, 08:38:49 AM

The script is just a transcripted form of the logic which already exists in the heads of many, many people. It's the intentions of those using the scripts. And if someone is clear about running a ponzi, warns about the risks and doesn't bullshit others with some "we generate money by trading" nonsense, I'm completely okay with it.

Like I said above, this is not what happens.

Quote from: allyouracid on April 07, 2016, 08:38:49 AM

But if they do bullshit others and eventually scam them, who's to blame? The one who used the gun and shot, the manufacturer, the shop which sold it, the government which created laws about possession of guns, or V/God* who created mankind in the first place?

When a gun manufacturer creates/produces a gun, there are several legitimate uses for said gun (eg self defense, hunting, ect.), and the vast majority of people who use such guns will use them for said legitimate uses, and a very small number of gun users/owners use guns for illegal/nefarious purposes. On the other hand, operators of ponzis almost always (when they are entrusted with other's money) will end up stealing from their players. There is a legitimate use for a ponzi script, however such use is almost never used.