Post
Topic
Board Reputation
Re: Evidence of alias (u=1764044) long con scam!
by
alia
on 06/03/2018, 00:03:26 UTC
Oh, gawd.. I've told you already, I stopped using the script. xDDDD

And also, my investors are not imaginary. read: nullius, SyGambler, TelevisionLover, so on and so forth, just ask them. Faggot.

What you're telling is mostly lies.

nullius and SyGambler have already stated that they don't have any proof of you actually making gambling profit with their money, or any proof of the script.

I'll go with Mr. Occam here.

Yeah, that's the way the Razor cuts for me too; there was no script.
If that is the case, it begs the questions:

1) The nearly half a BTC he/she/etc. paid out below was seed money. What for?
2) What did aTriz do or see, in order for him to vouch it?

Quote from: alia
Name      Amount    Return Amount    ROI

 slaman29    0.005           0.007              140%   
    nullius         0.01            0.02              200%
 slaman29     0.1              0.11               110%
 slaman29     0.1              0.107             107%
  v4d1mm    0.005           0.0058           116%
  v4d1mm    0.0475           0.052           109%
SyGambler    0.01            0.014           140%
TelevisionLover  0.01            0.013           130%
TelevisionLover  0.05            0.055           110%
TelevisionLover  0.1            0.109           109%
SyGambler    0.01            0.012           120%
TelevisionLover  0.2            0.22             110%
TelevisionLover  0.2            0.21             105%
TelevisionLover  0.2            0.22             110%
TelevisionLover  0.25            0.275           110%
TelevisionLover  0.25            0.275           110%
live:tonyl6         2.5              2.8           112%
favours         0.8              0.88           110%


Not that it's inconsistent with alia's inconsistency, but I'd have thought that the best way of continuing to bluff this out would have been to push the following story, rather than attempt to argue that math isn't math. The claimed unspecified alteration in house edge would make redundant calcs based on 1%.

Quote from: alia
As for "no strategies will work in gambling" - this does not apply to someone who was intimate with the dev who owns the gambling site, and thus has some insider information.

I'll elaborate further:
The site in question uses an interesting system to rope in users. For each new user, it will let them get a certain amount of profit with ease (the house edge is significantly lower), and once this quota is hit, they will start losing. This way, people feel like the game is not rigged and even upon losing it all, they'll keep trying to put in more money. What I do is, I play until the quota is almost hit, and then I cash out.

Although his/her/etc. later claims that
Quote
tweaking
made the "script" work on more than just one site are yet another inconsistency.





I paid out a lot. Almost $5k. Say what you will about that