If I wear a Marlboro Classic shirt that does not mean I endorse smoking.
You are so little minded.
Enough.
If marlboro pays you to advertise for them, and you do, THEN YES.
Are you really trying to say that you've only had one account on betcoin.ag? And that your ip wasn't blocked due to multiple accounts? I don't have the time to dig up all the evidence....Just suffice it to say, you seriously lack credibility.
Creating multiple accounts when your accounts have been banned in some way in order to use the chat feature is not "multi accounting". Multi accounting refers to making multiple accounts in order to play in the same tournament or cash game in order to take advantage of the other players. If Twitchy has been doing this, that IS a problem and if you could show evidence of that it would go a long way to damage his credibility.
True. Multi-accounting has ruined lucrative careers....Look up the stoxtrader (Nick Grudzian)/Leatherass (Dusty Schmitt) incident. It's very serious. Dusty wasn't even directly involved, yet his career took a huge hit. Having multiple accounts on a single poker site is against a poker sites terms and conditions, regardless if the bad actor admits to collusion, short stacking, rat-holing, softplay, or multiple entry because it is hard to prove intent. It was sufficient enough to ruin Dusty's career that multiple accounts were established, even though he wasn't proven to be the culprit; Nick was the Culprit.
It is the responsibility of the site operator to ban multiple accounts to protect the integrity of the game.
This will lead you to the consensus in the poker community on the practice of multi-accounting:
http://www.internettexasholdem.com/poker-forum/general-board/nick-quotstoxtraderquot-grudzian-resigns-over-cheating-61589.html There's also a link to the 2plus2 thread that detailed the incident.
So yeah, multi-accounting is serious. You've accused me of it, I've denied it, and then you said you didn't have time to provide any evidence.
In the mean time you've acted as if the piles of evidence I've presented proving Betcoin has been lying simply does not exist.
I provide evidence.
You provide excuses.
Are you really trying to say that you've only had one account on betcoin.ag? And that your ip wasn't blocked due to multiple accounts? I don't have the time to dig up all the evidence....
I've created tons of accounts to use in their chat and forum, never to cheat other players.
Just suffice it to say, you seriously lack credibility.
I don't need credibility, I have EVIDENCE.
You admitted to multi-accounting.
Look, this is all I'm saying. You've been ranting every since you were banned. However, I've given you the benefit of the doubt and have been keeping up, for the most part, on your claims. But, this is it....the mistakes that betcoin made they compensated for, the issue with Jason was resolved (albeit...the details are part of a NDA), and the issues with Betsoft is complicated to say the least. Betcoin contracts out to pretty established sites for their software which are licensed by gaming authorities (albeit: the licensing authorities are in different jurisdictions)....Betsoft is no small provider....their integrity affects a huge portion of the gaming market so their actions will be audited and peer reviewed; dismissing them as fraudulent without audit is not something that should be taken lightly. As for the claims that Betcoin changed the rules in the description of the game: that was after Jason's claims were being reviewed and the interpretation of the rules were clarified to avoid similar instances from occurring again. Now, it was already established that Jason had a legitimate claim and it was never argued that those rules were there prior to Jason's win....You, I, casinolistings, Betcoin, and everybody else in chat had seen Jason's argument. Fixing the terms on the game to clarify the rules was the responsible thing for Betcoin to do after Betsoft appended their terms so that nobody else would face the same problem that confronted Jason in the future....The fact that the date wasn't edited was just an oversite and didn't affect Jason's case which was already recorded and established.
Now, I have not seen ( And I've been playing at Betcoin, quietly, for quite some time) any tangible evidence that Betcoin is purposely trying to scam anybody out of their money; in fact, they are quite generous and have compensated for any mistakes that have been made, unlike other sites. That's all we can ask: I still haven't been paid from tilt, lock, bulldog, received some comps from UB/AP but not all, and I have been duped by several flyby night bitcoin gambling sites here on this forum <-- my bad.
But, back to the point. I trust Betcoin and I would not endorse a site that I did not believe in. I've been around the scene for a long time and I recognize a bad site. So, to threaten me with negative trust for endorsing a site I believe in without providing credible evidence that they are scamming is insincere. I have never had a problem with Betcoin and I've been playing with them for a few years....I have never scammed anyone nor cheated anybody out of what was rightfully theirs, and Betcoin has never cheated me. So, at this point, after looking at all the evidence, and in my defense, I am stuck with having to question the credibility and integrity of those making the accusations. And, if I have to be bullied with negative trust for wearing Betcoin's signature than so be it....I have to stand up for who I believe has the better integrity and that's Betcoin.ag in this case.