Disregarding the current situation right now, I am inclined to think the opposition toward cicadasTR's flag is an exercise of good judgment. The flag was a reference to an accusation thread where narrative was conditioned and the evidences were fabricated. Will you say examplens is biased because he opposed a flag that's raised under a violation of ToS [refusal to perform KYC], a false accusation, and based on invalid evidences?
Both flags set by lesliegray and cicadasTR refer to cases where they received their funds.
So, cicadasTR case
Betnomi 0.16090?? BTC no pay, bet history missing, geoblocked post withdrawal is positively solved for him and there is no basis for a supporting flag.
lesliegray created a flag on this
Betnomi closed my account and took my funds (3600$) after I completed KYC also decided in his favour, the flag is defective in this case.
examplens, you did oppose my flag as well and when I saw your replies to my posts I quickly understood that you don't have a clue on how things works.
I would say that you don't understand very well how things work with creating flags. At some point, you both
you and cicadasTR created a flag for the same thing and asked for support. When we add to that his
cicadasTR attempted manipulation in that case, you both got a question mark from me for bias.
I think I even got a PM from you, where you said that you made a mistake and that you didn't know how the flag system works.
I will not go further into this discussion. If you want to argue with someone and ask for support to slander anyone, I am not a good interlocutor for that.
If we talk about my bias, it can only be towards a fair and honest business. I have no relationship with Betnomi. I don't know anyone from there, I've never had an account there, nor have I ever received money from them.
If there is a real case, with unequivocal evidence against them, I will not hesitate to support the flag in that case or to leave them negative feedback.