It's clear that this forum and the members who are keeping bc.game running longer than it should are going to continue to help bc.game milk the cow until nothing is left. When they stop spending funds on advertising or when they are legally required to cease operation, they will surely disappear. They are already freezing accounts and selectively stealing from players, there's no reason to believe they will let people withdraw before they close down.
Can you elaborate by providing names that you think are keeping BC Game going longer than it should?
Primarily the users who are in charge of advertising/marketing and public relations/complaint management. They would be
very aware of the malpractice, and should already be criticizing bc.game, instead of enabling them to continue. The names can come out when it's time for them to come out. I've already been punished and had my credibility damaged for pointing the main source out in the past. Just check the two red ratings on my profile for the one who is enabling them via advertising/marketing. There are others, but I don't want to be painted red by them too. When the bc.game empire falls, I'll name them all...but it should already to everyone as to who they are.
I hope that the forum reprimands those who have been enabling the scam, as even though they will have made a massive amount of money for enabling it for so long, they should at least lose their reputation here for keeping it running. If they aren't, that will prove a massive level of corruption on the forum for enabling and prolonging such a scam, and allowing members who enabled it to continue being recognised as credible members here. If it weren't for these members (who are very aware of what is going on by this point and clearly negligent of as to what is right and wrong), bc.game might have been ousted as a scam and may already have been closed by now, or at least would have lost its reputation.
The forum itself will not reprimand any members for anything they might have done, that is not how things work. If members get together and form consensus, they could tag accounts but for that to happen there has to be a case. If you feel strongly about this you should at least provide names along with posts that prove some sort of collusion because you cannot make a case without evidence.
[/quote]
The community should reprimand accomplice/enabler of any crime or scam. Whether they do or don't is up to them, though I am sure we can agree that in a community where fairness and justice are core values, that's what would be done.