Username:

Bitcoin.com

No confirmation code received here either though.

Thanks!

https://i.imgur.com/mFWSymz.jpg


June 10th, 2016
Just recently, one of our Euro currency players, ‘PierreS’, made his first and only deposit of €35.00 and successfully wagered his free deposit bonus.
He then managed to net himself €40,119.60 on a single €24.00 bet playing Netent’s “Jack and the Beanstalk” at our casino.

At the time of play that was the equivalent of winning BTC98.81 on a single BTC0.06 bet!

Casino.bitcoin.com offers a 2 BTC + 100 free spins welcome bonus, as well as three great promotions every week, and features over 1,000 games from 7 different game providers. What makes our player’s recent large win even more amazing is the fact that ‘PierreS’ had only been playing at Casino.bitcoin.com for 3 days before winning this staggering amount.

Huge wins like this don’t happen every day, and are practically unheard of so soon after a casino’s launch. The game which resulted in the massive windfall, Jack and the Beanstalk, is known to produce winners on a regular basis and we look forward to more players winning a very decent chunk of change at our Casino!

Roger Ver, Bitcoin.com's CEO, had this to say about the fantastic news:
“We certainly weren't expecting such a large win within the first two weeks of our Casino's operation, but a win this big just goes to show all of us that a little luck goes a long way! We're delighted that one of our players has been able to share in our success at such an early stage and we look forward to congratulating many more big winners in the future!”

Casino.bitcoin.com would like to congratulate “PierreS” on his massive win and we invite all players, new and old, to try their luck at being the next big winner on Jack and the Beanstalk!


Media contact:
Name: Mate Tokay
Email: mate@bitcoin.com

Hi again Curious8,

My apologies for the delay in getting back to you. Our partners at SoftSwiss have gotten back to me about this and have stated that games are already filtered, i.e. a player from a NetEnt-restricted country won't see NetEnt games on the site.

For your convenience I have included here a list of which game providers restrict players from which countries, providers separated by colour:

NetEnt - Restricted:
USA - US
North Korea – KP
Iran - IR
Algeria – DZ
Ecuador - EC
Indonesia – ID
Myanmar - MM
Afghanistan - AF
Albania – AL
Angola – AO
Cambodia – KH
Guyana – GY
Iraq – IQ
Kuwait – KW
Lao – LA
Namibia – NA
Nicaragua – NI
Pakistan – PK
Panama – PA
Papua New Guinea – PG
South Korea – KR
Sudan – SD
Syria – SY
Uganda – UG
Yemen – YE
Zimbabwe – ZW
Israel – IL
Hong Kong – HK
Philippines – PH
Taiwan – TW
Indonesia – ID
Canada – CA
Singapore – SG

NetEnt - Restricted unless local license:
Denmark – DK
Italy – IT
Belgium – BE
Romania – RO
Spain – ES
France – FR
United Kingdom – GB

Amatic - Restricted:
USA – US
Greece – GR
Austria – AT
Estonia – EE

Quickfire - Restricted:
USA - US
Singapore - SG
South Africa - ZA
France - FR

Quickfire - Restricted unless local license:
Italy – IT
Denmark - DK
United Kingdom
Spain – ES
Belgium - BE

Ezugi - Restricted:
USA - US
Israel - IL

Endorphina - Restricted:
USA - US

iSoftBet - Restricted:
USA – US
France - FR
French Polynesia - PF
Afghanistan – AF
Antigua and Barbuda - AG
Belgium – BE
Cuba – CU
Iran – IR
Iraq – IQ
Israel – IL
Liechtenstein – LI
Sudan – SD
Syrian Arab Republic – SY
Macao – MO
Netherlands Antilles - AN
Luxembourg - LU

iSoftBet - Restricted unless local license:
United Kingdom – GB

Quickspin - Restricted:
American Samoa - AS
Cuba - CU
Denmark - DK
France - FR
France, Metropolitan
French Guiana - GF
Hong Kong - HK
India - IN
Iraq - IQ
Islamic Republic of Iran - IR
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea - KP
Republic of Korea - KR
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya - LY
Myanmar - MM
Macau - MO
Northern Mariana Islands - MP
Nigeria - NG
French Polynesia - PF
Sudan - SD
French Southern Territories - TF
United States - US
Virgin Islands, US - VI
Zimbabwe - ZW

Game Art- Restricted:
Belgium- BE
Bulgaria - BG
Cyprus - CY
Estonia - EE
France - FR 
Hong Kong - HK
Israel - IL
Spain - ES
USA – US

Hi Curious8,

Thank you for your suggestion!

I will bring this up with SoftSwiss and see if it's possible to get it done. Unfortunately some game providers restrict access to players from a number of countries (Italy, France, Denmark etc.) for various reasons, and if filtering games by IP is not possible I will provide a list here (and have it added to our FAQ) showing which providers accept customers from which countries.

You will then be able to use that list to manually filter providers which do not permit players from your country using our currently existing Game Provider filter on the main Games page.

Hi JasonXG,

Thank you for your question, and my apologies for the delay in getting back to you about it!

According to our Bonus T&C's (paragraph 7a):

As a result, there is no need for any such warning because the player starts using his real balance, not his bonus, from his first bet.

Okay, just one more to clarify for you and others who might still have questions:



Screenshot of Player #5127 (andre_ffer7 - using a permanent Hotmail email address) shows the first login time as 2016-05-22 19:51:26 UTC from IP address 192.160.102.164:
https://i.imgur.com/VvBhuKi.png

Screenshot of Player #6203 (mark_11kaymen - using a temporary, disposable Yopmail email address) shows the first login time as 2016-05-24 23:38:24 from a different IP address that I have hidden from public view (later 192.160.102.164 login highlighted):
https://i.imgur.com/i5sASpQ.png
Do you consent to me posting a screenshot with the IP address of the first login from your mark_11kaymen account?


Therefore, both accounts do use the same IP address, yes, however they were registered using different IP addresses. As the logs show, you accessed your "mark_11kaymen" account from the 192.160.102.164 IP address 4 days after you created the "andre_ffer7" account, and 2 days after you last logged in to the "andre_ffer7" account from that particular IP address (192.160.102.164).



Indeed, and there is no way for us to know who owns that Bitcoin address - you, or somebody else. However, you have failed to address any of the concerns in my last post with any evidence at all. If you cannot or are not willing to provide actual evidence to back up your claims - especially when I have produced veritable reams of evidence in our defense - then it's safe to say that you don't have any such evidence at all.



You will find that the double-spend transaction associated with the input address which you have stated you don't control (your story does not hold up when faced with the evidence I have provided in my last 2 posts in this thread) does indeed appear on the Bitcoin blockchain, as referenced in my first rebuttal post in this very thread.
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/tx/518cf0067c0356fe0d9b555111c30330e39cfc9935beb7b26aafd26f4907f72b

Blockchain.info prunes such double-spend transactions from its database, so you will need to rely on a different Block explorer to view double-spends. A lot of people are unaware of that, but now you know.

Please see this very well put quote from DarkStar_:





In his previous post in this thread, the OP signed off with the name "Mark", matching the name of the disposable Yopmail email address that he used as part of his double-spending scam:


However, in a different post on this forum from December, 2015, where he's trying to sell an Apple iPhone he signs off with the name "Kevin", one which seems to match his username (kevincl01) here on bitcointalk:


He also seems to know a little more about how Bitcoin works than he suggests, given that he is interested in another casino's Bug Bounty. It's very odd indeed that we got a similar email a week or so ago from somebody wondering if we have a Bug Bounty, and utilising a double-spend attack as one such "Bug". My gut tells me that this user and the one that emailed us are one and the same, and having not paid them a bounty (as this is not a bug), they have decided to slander us here on the forum. Please see their Bug Bounty message in another thread here:


He is also aware of Bot use on Bitcoin casinos in an attempt to gain an upper hand, as is evident by his following old post, suggesting that he's well aware of how Bitcoin casinos and Bitcoin itself works:


Kevin / Mark (though I'm 100% sure it's Kevin - a Google search of your username speaks volumes, though I certainly won't post any personal information here), it's about time you issued us with an apology for making false scam accusations after we caught you out trying to defraud our Casino through double-spending, don't you think? Your attempt to scam us has failed, your attempt to slander us has failed, and any further attempts will continue to fail.

You'll find that everything I have stated in this thread is backed up by the evidence I have provided. Please re-examine that evidence; the fact that it is irrefutable truth will quickly become apparent.

You already have a reputation as a scammer so we won't be wasting any more of our time dealing with you. Our legitimacy is not in question in the face of the evidence provided in this thread. If you have any further questions please refer to the evidence contained in my posts.

This will be our last comment to you on this matter in this thread. We hereby consider the issue closed due to your inability to produce any evidence to back up your claims after we have provided huge amounts to back up our position.

Hi kendari,

Please see my post regarding this user's false accusations on the first page of this thread, here.

Hi rambeazle,

Absolutely not, no.

The privacy of our legitimate users - both those with complaints and those without - is held in the highest regard. The privacy of users that have demonstrably attempted to steal from us most certainly is not. They gave up their presumption of privacy when they attempted to double-spend and steal from us, and when they came here and cried "Scam!" despite their hands being the dirty ones.

All information that was made available here was posted in order to be able to adequately defend ourselves against this user's false claims, and prove our innocence in this regard [any private IP addresses were redacted as a final courtesy, with one of their VPN IP addresses which logged into both accounts being shown to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that both accounts are linked].

I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that this was a "complaint" rather than an attempt by the OP of this thread to defraud us, but the only way I can imagine that is possible is if you have not examined in full the evidence that has been provided. If that is indeed the case, please do so in order to be able to make accurate statements in regard to our policies.

Privacy is sacrosanct on Bitcoin.com and its sub-domains, but we will not allow ourselves to be taken advantage of nor publicly tarnished with false accusations of scamming.

Thanks for helping point this out in a far clearer fashion than I managed to, DarkStar_! 

Indeed it is, and we are not going to allow ourselves to fall victim to scams.

You certainly did state that you "bought 0.03 BTC" two days ago, but this tells us nothing more than the fact that you purchased some bitcoins. In the post above you make it sound like you had the BTC sent directly to the deposit address in your Casino.bitcoin.com account; while that would be quite unusual, it is certainly possible, and I have no immutable evidence with which to refute that specific claim.

However, I do have to take this opportunity to point out a few things which don't quite give your explanation a grounding in reality:

There is no way that this supposed person who sold you BTC would have known that the address the BTC was sent to was owned by us. It simply appears to be a normal multi-sig address, which it is. It is entirely indistinguishable from any other multi-sig address. Therefore - assuming you were telling the truth - if he attempted to double-spend so you wouldn't receive the bitcoins you paid for then he was attempting to defraud you as he almost certainly would have presumed the address was owned by you. In this case you should converse with this supposed "guy" and ask why he scammed you.

But wait! The story continues!

You are then asking us to believe that - in a coincidence of unbelievable proportions - the same amount, minus 0.001 BTC (an amount which funnily enough was the fee for previously sending 0.029 BTC from the same input to the same input; very odd that this "guy" would send his funds from his own single address to his own address) - was sent to somebody else's Casino.bitcoin.com account from the same input address (i.e. from this same "guy").
Bizarrely, this happened after the amount that you supposedly purchased was lost on bets in our Casino, and only then was it double-spent to stop the deposit from ever confirming. What a considerate fellow this "guy" is - perhaps he's psychic and somehow knew that you had placed a bet and lost in our online Casino, and he decided that he'd like to make sure you got the funds back so he double-spent the bitcoins in order to stop you losing money!

Even stranger than that, the second deposit was NOT double-spent after winning on bets in our Casino! Wow! This supposed "guy" that sold you BTC is a very strange selective scammer if, thinking that you owned the address, he only scammed you after you lost the funds in our Casino, but didn't scam the next person he sold the exact same amount of BTC to after that person had a win in our Casino! Shocking! [Vice-versa, but I'm sure my point is clear!]



I am making no such assumptions; I have quite clearly shown that the double-spend attack was the reason for the low transaction fees in this instance. Sending a low fee transaction does not mean you automatically double-spend. You have to actively try to double-spend your input, it cannot 'just happen' due to adding a low transaction fee. Furthermore, if some people do not have much money to spend and - crucially - are doing "everything to save, including sending transactions with a small fee", it is highly unlikely that A) they would have wasted 0.001 BTC (~€0.41) in a transaction fee sending funds from their own address to their own address, and B) that they would consider even a very generous 0.0001 BTC (~€0.04) transaction fee prohibitively expensive, instead attaching an inadequate 0.00000568 BTC (~€0.002327) transaction fee.

Secondly, I am not disclosing other people's information. I am disclosing your information, which I sought prior approval for via PM and which you have acknowledged here. The first email address is your own Hotmail address, the second is a disposable Yopmail address. Both are owned by you, and you and I both know that. As you are now falsely accusing us of disclosing other people's information, we will defend ourselves accordingly. Below you will find screenshots (note Player URL) of you actually using the same VPN IP address (192.160.102.164) on both accounts - perhaps consider covering your tracks better next time if you do not wish for your explanations to be torn to shreds:

http://i.imgur.com/VvBhuKi.png
http://i.imgur.com/i5sASpQ.png


Attempting to scam us is completely unacceptable, but thank you for helping test our fraud detection system and allowing our employees to get even more experience in detecting and preventing double-spends. It is most appreciated, and we expect that you won't feel the need to throw any more of your money away testing it again. If you do feel like repeating this charade then you will experience the exact same result - loss of funds and another thorough rebuttal of your scam accusation, with the proof included to show that you are a barefaced liar, a reviled scammer and are absolutely not to be trusted.

We will not be responding to any further communication from you, and any further attempts by you to call us scammers will simply be met with a link to my two explanatory posts in this thread.

To add a little humour to an outrageous, unnecessary situation, I believe the much-loved book and film character Mr. Willy Wonka said it best:

https://i.imgflip.com/14ueal.jpg

We do indeed, and I removed the player's IP addresses for this reason. However, this player has attempted to defraud and steal from our Casino. In such instances, "naming and shaming" is often the best course of action and it can sometimes also prevent other casinos from being defrauded by the same user. As a result, the email addresses (one Hotmail, one a disposable Yopmail) were posted.

I know you like to try pick at anything to do with us, and people doing that is an exceptionally good thing because it ensures that a company holds itself to the highest standards and conducts its business accordingly.

If you have any input on this user's attempt to defraud our Casino we'd love to add that to the discussion here.

[Please also note that the images which appear in your quoted post were incorrectly linked prior to my subsequent post edits. They are now in the correct places. If you'd like to re-quote the post I'd greatly appreciate it as this account cannot yet display linked images, but of course that is entirely up to you.]

Our Casino is 100% legitimate, our reputation and domain means far more to us than any amount of funds, and we are backed by an entity which already holds a very significant amount of BTC so we have absolutely no incentive to steal any funds from anyone. As long as all Casino rules are followed, all winnings can be withdrawn.

I will outline our proof below, and include screenshots. Screenshots can be falsified, of course, but the Bitcoin blockchain cannot so I encourage all users not to rely on screenshots as evidence. Take only immutable information as truth.


★★What the user did not state in their OP is that they also have another account on our Casino using a different IP address. This account uses the email address "andre_ffer7@hotmail.com", which I will refer to as "andre_ffer7". This actually breaches the T&C's of our Casino and makes both accounts liable to disabling. Though there is no clear link in the Dashboard logs, the Bitcoin address and Bitcoin blockchain provides all the evidence we need.★★

Pertinent information:

There are 3 different addresses we need to look at here:

• 1C25NdiY9UbWQ2LdrVkMywbzUGAN8GDWaY (User's input address, as stated in OP)
• 37VqA6YtPUqWkubY3Z6ESJXkMpucGcThfD ("andre_ffer7" output address - one of our deposit addresses, NOT stated in OP)
• 37poxtVQmj4fAMKBXJ8aiP2xf69QHdQqri ("mark_11kaymen" output address - one of our deposit addresses, stated in OP)

There are 2 separate accounts (arranged here by time of use):

• andre_ffer7
• mark_11kaymen

andre_ffer7 (37VqA6YtPUqWkubY3Z6ESJXkMpucGcThfD):

I can confirm that 37VqA6YtPUqWkubY3Z6ESJXkMpucGcThfD is this user's deposit address for Casino.bitcoin.com, using the account "andre_ffer7" (Player# 5127, which can be seen in the Dashboard URL)
http://i.imgur.com/2ZiZxSC.png

You will note that this transaction to the "andre_ffer7" account was sent with a insufficient fee to relay:
http://i.imgur.com/mpjlakE.png
http://i.imgur.com/9LyrJB1.png
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/tx/518cf0067c0356fe0d9b555111c30330e39cfc9935beb7b26aafd26f4907f72b
Please note the input address (1C25NdiY9UbWQ2LdrVkMywbzUGAN8GDWaY) in the above transaction.


mark_11kaymen (37poxtVQmj4fAMKBXJ8aiP2xf69QHdQqri):

I can confirm that 37poxtVQmj4fAMKBXJ8aiP2xf69QHdQqri is this user's deposit address for Casino.bitcoin.com, using the account "mark_11kaymen" (Player# 6203, which can be seen in the Dashboard URL)
http://i.imgur.com/r0vnEi0.png

You will note that this transaction to the "mark_11kaymen" account was sent with an insufficient fee to relay:
http://i.imgur.com/YNrpz97.png
http://i.imgur.com/ThC0Kbc.png
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/tx/e437a2c31a644bf0fd5e380aecb457df5b9250b189c50d81f6cbb385946774ae
Please note the input address (1C25NdiY9UbWQ2LdrVkMywbzUGAN8GDWaY) in the above transaction.


Player# 5127 andre_ffer7@hotmail.com
Player# 6203 mark_11kaymen@yopmail.com

I noticed the above accounts when checking the unconfirmed deposit for player 5127, and I happened to see another deposit for player 6203 in our Dashboard timeline. The amount was strikingly similar to the unconfirmed deposit for player 5127 so I looked into the Tx info on blocktrail.com and noticed the same address (1C25NdiY9UbWQ2LdrVkMywbzUGAN8GDWaY) being used to fund both accounts with 0.02xxxxxx BTC, despite that address only ever having received 0.03 BTC in total.

This transaction (double-spend, unconfirmed) was to the account andre_ffer7@hotmail.com
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/tx/518cf0067c0356fe0d9b555111c30330e39cfc9935beb7b26aafd26f4907f72b
https://blockchain.info/tx/518cf0067c0356fe0d9b555111c30330e39cfc9935beb7b26aafd26f4907f72b
[Now pruned - please see at Blocktrail.com]

This transaction (confirmed) was to the account mark_11kaymen@yopmail.com
https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/tx/e437a2c31a644bf0fd5e380aecb457df5b9250b189c50d81f6cbb385946774ae
https://blockchain.info/tx/e437a2c31a644bf0fd5e380aecb457df5b9250b189c50d81f6cbb385946774ae


We allow 0 confirmation play on our Casino, and you tried to take advantage of that to defraud us.

As can very clearly be seen by the evidence presented above you sent 0.02999432 BTC to your "andre_ffer7" account with an inadequate fee, which you lost, so you double-spent that amount and sent 0.02899342 BTC to your "mark_11kaymen" account.

The most common way that players attempt to double-spend at a 0 confirmation casino is by sending a transaction with insufficient fees; if they win at the casino, they simply wait and let the transaction confirm. If they lose, they quickly double-spend making the original transaction null and void.

We do NOT allow double-spenders on our Casino, and as per our Casino rules if you attempt to defraud us you are liable to having all funds in your account confiscated. These are the terms by which you agree to play on our Casino.

If you have any further questions please ask them here in public for all to see, or if you wish to refute any of the above presented evidence please feel free to do so and I will respond when time permits.

Thank you.

Thanks bitkilo!


PM received, thank you. I will respond in a separate post below.

Hi there kevincl01,

Can you please provide me with your Casino username via PM?

Thanks so much!

Hi sintax,

The main people behind this Casino are Roger Ver and Mate Tokay, both notable names in the Bitcoin world, but neither are Bitcoin developers. As I mentioned earlier in this thread in response to another poster, Bitcoin.com is a privately held domain and it is very important to note that Bitcoin.com does not present itself as an official representative of Bitcoin. It should also be noted that there are no 'owners' of Bitcoin technology as a whole, just many people who contribute code to an open source project.

Bitcoin.com is simply an online resource to learn more about Bitcoin, and provides links to various Bitcoin services (exchanges, wallets, entertainment, etc.) and we are not in any way related to the developers working on the Bitcoin protocol itself.

Great, glad to hear it was resolved. Thanks for playing with us memphixx!

Okay great, thanks for the info Raimonn!

We have now added a notice for players to review Bonus Terms & Conditions prior to depositing

Thanks for your suggestion, joksim299!

Hi Raimonn,

Thanks for trying out our Casino! We're glad to hear that your deposit was received quickly. Was there any specific issue noted with your withdrawal, and was the email sent immediately upon attempting to withdraw?

The rollover was set and is controlled by SoftSwiss, and was set at that level at their recommendation. Again, as we are still 'finding our feet' in the casino business we defer to SoftSwiss' greater knowledge on this particular aspect of the casino at this time. This may change in future!