All Activity

S

Xxxc Dd

Hi everyone, a ~100% bonus was applied automatically on a $100 deposit without a clear opt-out. My balance peaked around $1,600, then dropped to $585.05 at “unlock”/cashout. To qualify for the bonus unlock, I had to wager over $7,000 in total, which made it very unlikely to keep a balance close to the peak. Support says the maximum amount that can be unlocked is capped at 100% of the bonus and any excess is confiscated. I’m challenging this due to lack of clear information at deposit/in-game and the disproportion between the bonus amount and the sum removed. Has anyone faced the same situation and managed to get a full/partial refund or a goodwill gesture? What steps and evidence made the difference (screenshots, betting logs, dated T&Cs version, detailed calculation, internal escalation, mediation/ADR)? Quick facts: Deposit: $100; bonus auto-applied; no explicit opt-out seen before playing. Total wager to unlock: >$7,000. Displayed peak balance: ~$1,600. At “unlock”/cashout: reduced to $585.05. Support’s position: unlock cap = 100% of the bonus; excess confiscated. Case in progress: withdrawal/ticket submitted; can share ID via DM if helpful. What I’m looking for: Real outcomes from players who obtained a review (refund/goodwill) in similar cases. The exact clause and dated T&Cs actually applied, plus the step-by-step calculation leading to $585.05 (cash/bonus fund order). Effective escalation path: who to contact on support/moderation and whether mediation/ADR helped. Attachments I will add: Screenshot 1: deposit + bonus applied (with timestamp). Screenshot 2: bonus “unlock” showing the confiscated amount and final $585.05 balance.

Future research in Human Resource Management, Artificial Intelligence, and Robotics for 2025 will focus on enhancing human–AI collaboration and ethical workforce automation. It will also explore adaptive learning systems, talent analytics, and the impact of robotics on employee engagement and job design.

سلام روز خوبی داشته باشید

Good luck to everyone

get a free 4,23 BCD$ cocco code valid for all vip levels : HERE

I recently came across the Castle App, and I thought it was worth sharing here because it’s becoming one of the most talked-about tools for streaming and managing media in 2025. The Castle App is designed for people who want a simple way to watch, organize, and enjoy entertainment across different devices. Whether you’re using Android, PC, or iOS, the app gives you smooth performance and an easy setup process. Here’s a quick Castle App guide Castle App for PC: You can run it on Windows or Mac using emulators like Bluestacks or Nox. It works great for those who prefer a bigger screen. Castle App for iOS: iPhone and iPad users can easily download and install it with no complicated steps—just a clean, hassle-free experience. Castle App Guide: The official guide helps users set up the app, manage downloads, and explore the latest updates. Overall, the Castle App stands out for its speed, clean interface, and wide content variety, making it a solid option for anyone who loves discovering new entertainment apps. If you want to learn more or follow updates, you can check out the full guide here: https://app-castle.com/

Ticket ID: 2588152390385545626 So I was watching this game and thought to place a bet on Arni Frederiksberg to score as it looked clear that more goals were going to be scored in the game. As you can see, i placed the bet when it was 2-0 and he scored the 4th goal. I open bc game to collect my winnings and to my surprise the bet for some reason has been cancelled and voided. I have now been on livechat for 5 days trying to get this resolved, yet they are saying the same issue they are 'looking at it' 'working urgently', yet they then said today i had to create a new ticket as it got messed up. They clearly are trying to get out of paying me and I am doing this to spread awareness, or maybe the team can rectify this mistake and settle the bet correctly. The livechat agent assured me to check in after 24 hours and it would be sorted yet nothing. Please help me out as this money is very much needed, especially after the crypto crash on Friday.

so no one bothers and a mwmber of staff read the post and decides to downvote the thread keep going bcgame with the shennanigans

Good money money

Building your own NFT marketplace gives you full control over branding, fees, and user experience. It also creates long-term revenue opportunities through commissions, partnerships, and community engagement.

Quick headline results Rows parsed: 62 Reported multipliers — mean ≈ 3.86, median 1.97, std ≈ 4.58 Computed (from hash) multipliers — mean ≈ 4.24, median ≈ 1.82, std ≈ 8.74 Reported > 10×: 5 rounds Reported > 5×: 13 rounds Reported < 2×: (majority) I computed multipliers using the common formula (first 13 hex chars → 52-bit integer → floor((100*2^52)/(2^52 - H))/100). I then compared those computed values with the reported multipliers from your paste. Important anomaly: many reported multipliers do not match the computed multipliers There are multiple mismatches where the multiplier derived from the hash (with the standard formula) differs substantially from the reported multiplier in your dataset. Example (top outliers from the top-10 list I showed): Round 8595489 — reported 27.69x, computed 1.02x (huge mismatch). Round 8595519 — reported 18.68x, computed 2.36x. Round 8595507 — reported 12.33x, computed 2.29x. Round 8595466 — reported 11.07x, computed 1.29x. Round 8595459 — reported 10.95x, computed 1.18x. In short: many of the largest reported multipliers don’t match the hash→multiplier computation using the standard formula. Some rounds do match reasonably (e.g., 8595492 reported 9.90x vs computed 8.84x — somewhat close), but many big ones are way off. Visuals I produced Histogram of computed multipliers (shows strong skew toward low values and a long tail). Time-series (round number vs computed multiplier) showing the computed outcomes over the rounds (round axis inverted because your data was newest-first). (You should see both charts in the output pane.) What this means (possible explanations) Different formula/seed stage used BC.Game may apply a different transform to the hash than the “first-13-hex → 52-bit → formula” I used (common but not universal). If they slice different bits or use an HMAC with another key/nonce, the computed multipliers will differ. Client seed / nonce mismatch The hash published in your paste might not be the final HMAC used to produce reported multipliers — maybe the hash you have is the server seed (or a preimage) while the site computes HMAC(server_seed, client_seed:nonce) for each player; if your client seed or nonce differs, your computed values won't match reported ones. Reported multipliers are pre-rounded / adjusted / house-edge applied They might apply a house-edge multiplier or different rounding rules. But the observed disagreements (like 27.69 → 1.02) are far too large to be explained by rounding/edge alone. Data alignment error It’s possible the data you pasted misaligned reported multiplier vs hash (e.g., the multiplier belongs to a different hash in the sequence). I parsed the text assuming each round number is followed immediately by the multiplier+hash; if that structure was broken in some parts, mismatches would appear. Malicious / buggy publication Less likely, but if the site shows one multiplier and publishes another hash, that would be a serious integrity issue. Recommended next tests (I can run these if you want) Verify parsing alignment — re-check the raw source to ensure each multiplier lines up with its hash (I used the strict round-line then multiplier+hash parsing). I can reparse more flexibly and report ambiguous lines. Try alternate hash→multiplier formulas: Use different prefix lengths (e.g., 8 hex, 16 hex). Test if the site uses int.from_bytes(full_hash) % N or other modulo methods. Test if they use HMAC(server_seed, client_seed:nonce) where server_seed is the hash field you pasted (i.e., compute HMACs with that as key and your known client seed if you supply it). If you can reveal client seed (or allow me to read it from your browser) I can compute HMAC(server_seed, client_seed:nonce) for each round and then compute multipliers — that will likely reconcile reported vs computed values. Check seed chain integrity — if BC.Game reveals server seeds in sequence, we can check whether seeds form a proper hash chain (seed_{n} = SHA256(seed_{n+1})). Practical next step I recommend now If you want a direct verification, provide one complete confirmed round where you have: the server seed (revealed), your client seed, and the nonce used for that bet (usually 1 if it’s the first bet). With those three I will compute the exact round hash (HMAC), calculate the multiplier, and show whether it matches the reported value. That will confirm the correct formula / whether client seed is applied.

Plinko nice

WiN_BiG_ToDaY_2020

hello there, if anyone is interested in a project like chainduelist.com hit me up. I'm looking for a partner who is completely aware about how marketing works nowadays, blunt investor or just to sell to just sell the project, but i honestly prefer a partner. you can find me on discord, twitch and whatever. cheers

the site is legit, if you got scammed it's not from bcgame

Read the Castle APK guide for more details

Yes, a cryptocurrency exchange development company can help build a peer-to-peer (P2P) platform. They offer expertise in blockchain, smart contracts, and secure transaction systems essential for P2P trading.

hmm i think they are pretty generous