Why do I think they lied about account removal and database erasure? Simply because their inconsistent statements suggest it. Initially, they said my account didn’t exist. Once I provided evidence proving it did, they claimed it was erased due to GDPR compliance. However, they continue to make assertions about what happened with my account and bets, which would require data they supposedly don't want to share.
Also I am sure they are lyng as, If the full data were to come out showing which bets were wins and which were losses, it would clearly reveal the actual results of my bets and might expose yet another instance of unfairness. As of now, you can't definitively say there were 48 losses or 57 losses in a row because the outcome of each bet is not visible. Without knowing the outcome-whether a bet was a win or a loss. Th lack of transparency makes it impossible to trust their narrative and only adds to the suspicion.
That could just as easily be 20 wins or 30 wins in a row, as we still don’t know the actual outcome of those bets. Without seeing the results clearly, it’s impossible to make an accurate judgment. The lack of transparency only fuels the doubt that something might be hidden.
If the existence of the database worked in their favor, as you suggest, then why not use it transparently to refute my claims once and for all? Instead, they rely on vague statements, contradictions, and the assumption that I asked for deletion without providing concrete proof. This behavior only fuels doubts about their integrity.
It will always be a doubt in my mind_no, not just a doubt; I am sure that I have been scammed by Duckdice. I’ve seen with my own eyes their ability to change bet results from a win to a loss. The proof of this exists, yet it seems like Holydarkness and other users either don’t want to read it or perhaps just can’t see it.
What’s even more concerning is that Duckdice.io’s own admin accepted that a bet result was manipulated. They apologized to the user, refunded the manipulated bet, and even called the user a VIP afterward. This clearly shows that they are capable of such actions. Once this has been admitted and proven, how can anyone deny the possibility that it’s happening to others as well, including me?
Imagine if I had even a single win during that alleged 158 losing streak - just one win- I would have reset my betting amount instead of continuing to bet in the hope of recovering my losses.
What if they manipulated my bets?. The way they keep hiding things, changing their statements, and avoding direct answers increases my doubts more and more. Instead of being transparent, their actions make me question the fairness of the entire system even further.
Ok, though I'll probably come back somewhere in the far or near future, to ask for confirmation to mark this case as resolved, I think this will be my parting words, as we went on and on and on the endless circles. I have covered that part too and I somewhat believe you've read them, why you re-raise that point here... well, circles.
Anyway, as everything seems to be moot at this point, [at least I can't see anything that I can do further] I'll take a spectator seat, with my explanation about how the inconsistencies is actually a consistency and add weight to their narrative, something that [again] I've covered in the past as well as the very post you quoted.
They [well,
he] look into your account in their database. He can't find it, hence the said that it didn't exist and asked you to prove that it actually existed. With the proof you have, he reached to their compliance department, or whichever department who handle database more comrehensively, probably complaining to them why the search won't bring result but there is a proof of that account being existed, and they explained that if an account existed at some point [and proven to be exist], but was not searchable on their database, then the most likely scenario is that it's completely removed due to that "right to be forgotten" kicked in.
Again, it's not that hard to understand, a short time mulling over this possibility would enough, something that I believe spectating overseers of this case have mulled over too. If you still can't accept that, well... then I don't think any further thing I say to help you gain other perspective will help.
With that, I am taking my spectator seat.