Quote from: examplens on September 20, 2022, 11:03:33 PM

Quote from: JollyGood on September 20, 2022, 05:12:21 PM

On a serious note, I think it is clear having someone as reputable and trustworthy as Hhampuz (who is part of a very small group I trust) as an escrow-only gives the group the opportunity to use his name and reputation as a way to entice investors either by design or by default.

Do you not feel maybe by having your name attached to this project (even as an unpaid contributor) you are risking your reputation? I mean if they have a well respected forum member such as yourself saying you are helping out on their website it could in the eyes of investors and newbies be taken as you giving the project a seal of approval-to-invest and I am sure that is not your intention.

DireWolfM14 is also part of escrow there, I would suggest you read his post in this thread, you probably missed it. He is very clearly explained his position in the whole story (I believe that Hhampuz also has a similar statement)
Check here > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5414027.msg60969839#msg60969839

I did not read it because I have him and several of his buddies on ignore and do not have much time for any of them, maybe occasionally temporarily unignoring them here and there to see what they are spouting if it happens to be in a thread that I take an interest.

Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 08:12:05 AM

Quote from: AnotherAlt on Today at 12:02:04 AM

Quote from: JollyGood on September 20, 2022, 05:12:21 PM

I would be inclined to advise all to look at the project with caution.

I am not a potential Investor. But do you still suggest everyone consider the project cautiously after reading Direwolf's statement?

I'd say it's wise to always use caution before investing in anything, especially crypto projects!

Of course, that is the best advice and one I would offer to all and have done many times in the past.

Quote from: LoyceV on Today at 08:12:05 AM

For the record, this is incorrect:

Quote from: Royse777isCasinoCritique on September 18, 2022, 08:28:52 PM

Casino Critique trying to raise 10 BTC

There are only 7,000 "chips" for sale, at 0.001BTC each. I'll do the math for you: they're looking to raise 7 BTC.

For investors to part with 7 BTC on the say-so of that group would be a remarkable achievement. I doubt they will raise anything near it.

Quote from: The Pharmacist on Today at 05:45:57 PM

Quote from: JollyGood on September 20, 2022, 05:12:21 PM

And reputable naim027 is banned right? I guess better to use that name when seeking funds rather than his alt-account called Dic3L0v3r because that would be a real put-off for investors Grin

Lol. Is that the account he used in his ban appeal thread? I remember making comments there, but for the life of me I cannot recall the name of the account he used, though I recognize the Dic3L0v3r name.

Yes it is the account he exchanged merits with himself at one time too and he uses the same Dic3L0v3r alt-account when bumping the thread hoping to have the naim027 account banned Grin

Quote from: The Pharmacist on Today at 05:45:57 PM

I've stated that I believe that the team behind In any case, I've disclosed my involvement and the extent of my endorsement (which is to weigh the risks vs. the potential profits and is essentially neutral) of CC. Hopefully if anything bad did go down, people wouldn't think that I profited or that I caused anyone to get scammed. And seriously, if any members here do think I'm promoting CC or doing something wrong, let it be known and we'll discuss it. I'm an anonymous username on a discussion forum, so my reputation is all I've got.

Thankfully they are not using your name on their promotional material. Anyway, you stated clearly what involvement you have and you also have an excellent reputation in the forum and it should stay intact regardless of what the future holds for Casino Critique.

You are an approachable person, I am sure if anybody has any concerns they can contact you in private and you will not hesitate to engage with them regarding whatever it is they might be finding problematic.