Quote from: holydarkness on Today at 09:52:36 AM

Quote from: BenCodie on June 03, 2025, 11:09:49 PM

It's already clear to many that bc.game only resolve cases that are posted on this forum to both protect their reputation here and likely because when "bc.game scam" is searched, only resolved cases are shown (creating the guise that bc.game is legitimate). It's already clear that you handle PR for them and other casinos, most likely for a reward from somewhere (direct or indirect) and that it isn't done for free (despite the word magic you continue to use around the topic).

You can keep dragging me into the conversation and wasting your time with your words, call me dysfunctional, write word walls to try and tarnish what my words mean, and so on, though it means very little to me. The truth is (no matter what you say about or to me) is that you are a part of keeping the bc.game scam machine alive, as well as other casinos here.
[...]

By me keeping the scam machine alive, BC as well as there casinos... you're referring to the casinos on this forum? Including the casinos which signature you're currently wearing?

As for "word magic", you can get exactly what you ask for, the exact statement word-for-word letter-for-letter character-for-character, an exact copy paste of,

Quote from: BenCodie on March 18, 2025, 02:05:08 PM

[...]
How about this:
"I, holydarkness, do not receive any form of incentive or financial motivation (from any party whatsoever) to communicate with casinos to resolve scam accusations for users."
[...]

All you need is to agree for my terms,

Quote from: holydarkness on March 18, 2025, 07:31:55 PM

[...]
So, the agreement will still stands, with a bit of modification. I'll say what you asked above, copy and paste them, to be exactly as you instructed. But if in the future, someone ever use the statement and/or the situation, verbatim or semantically, in a negative connotation, just like what you did above, [and to make it abundantly clear, the word "bridge", used like above quoted, is obviously and automatically fall into the semantic category of the statement], you'll pay me 25,000 USD for every time the situation occurs, as well as explaining to the public of that self-proclaimed thingy or whatever semantic and/or verbatim word they used. Stressing the point, as I am fair, it'll only take effect if it's used in negative connotation.
[...]

But... wait. Of course you can't agree to it, because when you do, you'll be the first one paying me, as you're the one that actively throwing that jabs with negative connotation at me. So the only option will be that you'll lose something to smear me certain color, of which... is your main agenda here, or you'll lose significant fund by time. Certainly that's the only reason why you can't agree to the terms, right? Because... I'm more than ready to swore that oath above. Just waiting for your move.

We're beyond the point of you needing to say that you have no form of incentive for doing what you do. No one would go to the lengths that you go to work for bc.game and other casinos with absolutely no incentive at all. At a minimum, you use the job to fill your campaign quota and to build your reputation as some sort of good samaritan that "helps players" with casino disputes. That's the minimum. I personally believe you are incentivized more than that, as I can't believe that a person could be so negligent of the obvious selective scamming operation that bc.game is conducting.

You can keep on saying I owe you 25k and all that garbage though it doesn't take away from the fact of what you are doing.

Also what "agenda" could I possibly have? What benefit do I get from calling out the problems that your "god's work" is causing? A negative trust rating from icopress is the only reward I've gotten so far. I get no benefit for highlighting your misdeeds. The real agenda is the selective casino scamming. I have no agenda other than pointing out it exists.

Quote from: JollyGood on Today at 08:03:39 AM

Quote from: BenCodie on June 03, 2025, 11:09:49 PM

Here is the trust rating that bc.game left on holydarkness' profile before it was removed:

Making invaluable contributions to the brand's reputation through handling their disputes for them, is handling their public relations for them, wouldn't you agree? This is the perspective of bc.game themselves.

Just because they have an opinion of one member it does not mean the sentiments are mutual. What is the difference if BC Game left a tag for you stating the exact words: "A wonderful user who has made an invaluable contribution to our brands reputation" and then members used that feedback to attack you? It is a one-sided feedback.

Well, the difference would be through my posts and actions. I am not using that feedback to attack hd, I am simply stating that he is acting as their public relations person (which, he is, as he is handling basically all of their scam accusation threads for them in the exact same way as if he were to be employed by them to do so).