+1

Seems to be the attitude on this subforum that no matter how backers act they are entitled to their makeup. Don't know either party can only go on what has been said but if backer starts implying physical violence or other types of threats/slander the agreement should be null and void.

backer tries to freeroll for several weeks , when things go south and backer realises the freeroll attempt was unsuccessfull decides he know wants to send funds(clearly being aware of his freeroll attempt given how things panned out in this thread) so gazzy can regrind his money back, obviously having an edge on 1/2 live and eventually will make the money back

so now gazzy decides he doesnt want to do it and people are saying that it doesnt work like that.

hmmm, seems very clear what i would do in his shoes

stick to it imo

Consensus seems be solid against remco except for one guy who didn't read the thread. Is there a way to make sure he cant look for horses hear without them knowing this story?

this obviously

also have fun in vegas

I mean apparently I am the only one here reading the whole thread .

Remco wrote that gazzyB ignored him while he tried to find a solution. And GazzyB writes something different.
If it is true that GazzyB ignored Remco, while Remco was friendly than I can't sympathize with GazzyB and GazzyB is than clearly the one who tried to freeroll.
If GazzyB story is true which is def a lot different, than GazzyB is obv correct.

But for me is no reason to believe someone more just cause he opened the thread while the other reacted to the thread.

So, about your accusation I don't read the whole thread here, I did, and probably I am nearly the only one .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If a man read thread without understanding did he really read thread? I would say no you say yes. Hah read again until understanding my friend.

So enlighten me pls . And say what is wrong about what I wrote.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hey Lux,

On 10th April Remco wrote to me saying that he wasn't going to send more money (he had previously said 5 or 6 times "ok, soon"). He said that he lost a lot of money staking and was stressed and wanted me to repay him because I had been doing well online. We spoke that day, I said 4 or 5 times that I wasn't going to pay him back out of my own pocket, and that if he sent more money then I would happily grind us back to even. He declined to send more money, and continued to insist that I repay him. I ended that conversation by once again saying that I wasn't prepared to send him the money, and that I didn't have anything else to say. It's also important to say Remco's "solution" was for me to repay him, and that was non-negotiable for him. There was no "finding a solution", when he says "solution", he means I repay him out my own pocket.

We spoke again on 19th April, and that was when things became confrontational from Remco. It was the same sort of conversation, I kept repeating I wasn't paying him back out of my own pocket, he was adamant I owed him money, and when he started to call me a thief and threaten to "see me in Vegas" and he "didn't know how but would get the money back" was when I ended the conversation again. He didn't try to contact me between 11th April and 19th April. When he did message me I responded, and I only ended conversations when I was tired of repeating myself.

Happy to answer any other questions.

Seems open and shut. Will bookmark this thread. Thx for outing this as it has an ancillary public benefit for the 2p2 community of how to resolve this type of dispute w/ 2p2 consensus.