Euler wrote: ↑Fri Jun 12, 2026 9:53 pm
Ok I'll give him a time out.
I personally do think that people who sell stuff should be accountable and prove that they are actually genuine because this is what this industry lacks. It has done for a long time and it always will do, especially the betting industry. It always suffers from people saying that they can do stuff when they clearly can't. This is what makes it so hard for me to actively promote the benefits of betting exchanges.
However all purchases are always made on the basis of caveat emptor. It is enshrined in law.
You also have this problem of compliance departments. I was asked to change my accounts so it's not unfeasible that others have been asked to do that too.
For me I have kept incredibly detailed records of everything that I've done, every image that I've posted, and every video that I've done, simply because I always knew that there would be scepticism.
But I also think there needs to be moral hazard. People who are challenging others need to come clean and show who they really are, put their balls are on the line and they take the consequences If they are wrong. If it's done anonymously, it carries no weight in my opinion.
Easy to take pot shots when there's no consequence.
But also let's broaden the discussion to people like tipsters. You see them all across the newspapers, on the TV, everywhere, and they're never held to account. Never.
It's always a source of great frustration to me that I'm doing some really cutting-edge work and yet will never see the light of day. If I tell you tomorrow to lump on at 9/4 on the TV, people will actually act on that.
I agree the industry has problems with accountability. But when a moderator steps in to defend someone with obvious edited P&L screenshots, hype that doesn't match reality, and £40k mentorships, it looks a lot like you're protecting a friend or a valuable member instead of staying neutral.
That's exactly why trust in this industry is dead. You're not calling for transparency — you're shielding him by shifting the focus to anonymous critics and "private records".
If you're going to moderate, moderate fairly. Covering for misleading practices only damages the forum's credibility too. The Gurubusters video already laid out the evidence. Real transparency would be full verified statements, not more excuses.
