Quote from: holydarkness on Today at 05:51:03 PM

Quote from: BlackyJacky on Today at 10:48:10 AM

Quote from: holydarkness on March 07, 2025, 10:52:44 PM

Nope, I am not playing both sides, I've withdrawn myself.

Please give us the date when you have withdrawn?

At least until February 28, 2025 you were actively misleading online casino victims and the public!

25th August, 2024. You need the exact hour and minutes and second too? The exact quote? I can help you with that and don't mind at all.

No, the date you claim to have withdrawn is fine.

The definition for a spectator is clear, it watches the show without chiming in.

But you chimed in multiple times to defend Stake/Casino Guru and attack a Stake victim:

Chime in 1)

Quote from: holydarkness on December 03, 2024, 03:44:46 PM

Without much experience on this field [so my words can perhaps be treated as empty air], IMO the idea that originals being rigged can be somewhat thwarted. On a past case regarding Stake's Minesweeper game, a rep of CG even went to a length to create an account here [granted, he didn't state it openly that he's the CG staff, but it can be very easily inferred], built his own verifier,explain to the player [whom... rather have similar trait with this OP] how he can test with his "home-made" verifier, and shown that [IIRC] random sampling came out verifiable.

Chime in 2)

Quote from: holydarkness on February 27, 2025, 05:13:29 PM

This is your case - https://casino.guru/stake-casino-player-suspects-casino-s-in-house-blackjack ? Have to dig CG to find the best match. Though the username is difference with the one used here, the writing style indicate it is yours.

They closed your case because you can't provide supporting evidence to back up your claim.

It's no one's fault but yours if you can't present a case with compelling basis for a rebuttal. Case on point, you come to the police and say your neighbor stole 30,000 USD from you. When they ask for evidence, you gave them an opinion of what you think should be happening instead of evidence-backed-fact.

https://talkimg.com/images/2025/02/27/qgQ7w.jpeg

Quote from: holydarkness on Today at 05:51:03 PM

Quote from: BlackyJacky on Today at 10:48:10 AM

Quote from: holydarkness on March 07, 2025, 10:52:44 PM

I simply didn't play and only take the spectator seat, jumping in every now and then when certain statements needs to be clarified [like this one].

Nice reverse logic, but when you "jump in every now and then", then you have not withdrawn!

A spectator only watches the show and doesn't jump in every now and then.

You are like a Chameleon, right?

a) When you see a chance to mislead online casino victims and the public, you chime in.

b) When you don't see a chance or after being caught, you suddenly switch to only a spectator! Cheesy

Not staying silent when people make false narrative about myself and my reputation is not ok?

It is ok to defend yourself when someone makes false claims about you.

But I didn't make false claims about you when you decided to chime in 3 times in the above quoted "Chime in 1) , 2) and 3)

So your interventions were not triggered because someone made false claims about you.

Quote from: holydarkness on Today at 05:51:03 PM

It called being "chameleon" and not "clarifying"?

Clarifying when someone made false claims about you isn't called being a chameleon.

Someone who habitually switches his appearance with chiming in and withdraw how it fits him well, that is called being a chameleon.

Quote from: holydarkness on Today at 05:51:03 PM

Ohh well, we certainly live in a different world.

The world we are living in is the same, but our mindset is different.

Quote from: holydarkness on Today at 05:51:03 PM

Granted, I usually ignore false and misleading narratives that was thrown as an attempt to paint me certain shade, like the ones made by... certain someone in this page, as it's a waste of time.

I speak only about our interaction and the interaction you have with @kingbj21 is your business and not mine.

Quote from: holydarkness on Today at 05:51:03 PM

But this one, I find it need to be addressed.

You don't find it needs to be adressed that you unjustifiably dismissed my 100% proof of Stake's rigged in-house Black Jack?

Quote from: holydarkness on Today at 05:51:03 PM

That should be acceptable, right?

Yes, it is absolutely acceptable if you defend yourself against false claims made about you.

But then you also should try to clarify when you made false claims about other parties, right?

Quote from: holydarkness on Today at 05:51:03 PM

Or is it not ok since me jumping in and clarifying made him caught red handed and kinda shine his questionable trait into the spotlight?

Yes, it is absolutely ok to clarify false claims.

Still waiting for you to clarify the false claims you made about me?