Sign In
Create Account
This topic is locked
I think for $200 checker should be without any errors also is this with DBC?
Scam report against | NodeCode | 595139 | 200$
Started By
pruned_78601323
, Jan 06 2017 03:54 PM
#51
Posted 06 January 2017 - 10:58 PM
iNulled
Offline
741
Likes
Likes
Posts: 992
Threads: 98
Joined: Aug 04, 2015
Credits: 0
Eight years registered
#52
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:00 PM
Coefficient
Offline
16
Likes
Likes
http://coefficient.me
Posts: 19
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 29, 2016
Credits: 0
Eight years registered
#52
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:00 PM
I highly doubt they are judging your code, I think they are judging the fact that as it was released early it's not working as everyone would expect so they want a refund. Even if it's a beta. It's up to you when you stop calling it a beta. You could keep it a beta forever and keep saying errors are normal, forever.
Everyone that bought the product has been thoroughly explained the terms and services, they all confirmed they were okay with helping me fix the bugs and that they did, in fact, know it was a beta and that errors WOULD occur.
#53
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:02 PM
Coefficient
Offline
16
Likes
Likes
http://coefficient.me
Posts: 19
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 29, 2016
Credits: 0
Eight years registered
#53
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:02 PM
Are you gonna waste your time arguing now or you are going to start coding instead?
Actually, I've been coding for 4 hours now. Thanks for letting me know 
EDIT: To everyone. You can all complain based on what Ivar said but nonetheless, we have the only checker that is proxyless and we didn't pull and iDev and scam everyone once our product got some criticism.
Edited by Coefficient, 06 January 2017 - 11:04 PM.
#54
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:02 PM
Lucas
Offline
7163
Likes
Likes
Your friendly nulled admin
[STAFF]
Posts: 32162
Threads: 145
Joined: Apr 22, 2015
Credits: 99
Eight years registered
#54
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:02 PM
Everyone that bought the product has been thoroughly explained the terms and services, they all confirmed they were okay with helping me fix the bugs and that they did, in fact, know it was a beta and that errors WOULD occur.
So Ivarovich must provide proof he didn't know this would happen, and you must provide proof you told him that it was a beta and he was part of the error checking team.
Normally, when you are uncertain your tool works properly, you let a few beta testers use it while you check for errors, and then release it to public after everything was tested. Why didn't you do that?
MY ONLY BITCOIN ADDRESS IS IN MY PROFILE. IF I SEND A DIFFERENT ONE IT'S NOT ME.
I HAVE 2 DISCORD PROFILES:
"@lucas.1337" DISCORD ID IS "474341590891102219"
"@n.to" DISCORD ID IS "1056693864322318406"
MY TELEGRAM: t.me/LucasNulledTo
https://www.nulled.t...ypto-addresses/
^MY ONLY CRYPTO ADDRESSES^
ALWAYS ASK FOR A PM, NEVER SEND ME MONEY WITHOUT RECEIVING A MESSAGE FROM ME ON NULLED. I WILL NEVER REFUSE TO PM YOU.
READ THIS TO AVOID BEING SCAMMED:
https://www.nulled.to/topic/543296-beware-new-impersonation-scam-must-read/
#55
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:05 PM
Cactopus
Offline
62
Likes
Likes
Junkie
Posts: 307
Threads: 48
Joined: Feb 19, 2015
Credits: 0
Eight years registered
#55
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:05 PM
I can confirm that the checker has been fixed and is working perfectly fine on proxyless, I haven’t ran in any errors so far.
Note: Failed accounts = incorrect pass
#56
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:06 PM
Coefficient
Offline
16
Likes
Likes
http://coefficient.me
Posts: 19
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 29, 2016
Credits: 0
Eight years registered
#56
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:06 PM
So Ivarovich must provide proof he didn't know this would happen, and you must provide proof you told him that it was a beta and he was part of the error checking team.
Normally, when you are uncertain your tool works properly, you let a few beta testers use it while you check for errors, and then release it to public after everything was tested. Why didn't you do that?
They are currently only 10 customers, all are beta testers and agreed to help us fix bugs.
#57
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:54 PM
pruned_7255949
Offline
116
Likes
Likes
account no longer active
Posts: 452
Threads: 98
Joined: May 01, 2016
Credits: 0
Eight years registered
#57
Posted 06 January 2017 - 11:54 PM
I can confirm that the checker has been fixed and is working perfectly fine on proxyless, I haven’t ran in any errors so far.
Note: Failed accounts = incorrect pass
Thank you @Cactopus, mods are free to pm or add me on skype: amazon.buy4you for any other proofs
account no longer active
#59
Posted 07 January 2017 - 12:08 AM
Darkr
Offline
184
Likes
Likes
broly7
Posts: 571
Threads: 105
Joined: Apr 30, 2015
Credits: 0
Eight years registered
#59
Posted 07 January 2017 - 12:08 AM
ayy lmao devs are arguing with a user that the tool is working, instead of trying to help the user fix the problem xDD
still waiting for green 
#60
Posted 07 January 2017 - 12:11 AM
Coefficient
Offline
16
Likes
Likes
http://coefficient.me
Posts: 19
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 29, 2016
Credits: 0
Eight years registered
#60
Posted 07 January 2017 - 12:11 AM
ayy lmao devs are arguing with a user that the tool is working, instead of trying to help the user fix the problem xDD
Actually, we did fix the problem. We are just demonstrating that our tool works fine now, yet, he refuses to discuss.
Users browsing this thread: and 4 guests
