Nice name...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sal monella
Considering Mansion gave the player a very generous additional $100 bonus with a 1x playthrough, I think it's largely irrelevant whether the player was still required to play the original bonus amount again.
|
It's entirely relevant. For one person in here who complains about this need to request that the bonus be made cashable, there are probably at least 7-8 others who either complain directly or don't complain at all.
The additional bonus was a good way to compensate - no question about that - but requiring the original bonus to be played through is still unsatisfactory since the player already met the requirements. Had the rep only required the additional compensation bonus to be played through, I don't think anyone could have argued with that.
Quote:
|
Having said that, Mansion definitely needs to fix its bonus system. By the way, the term they use is "promote." Once you complete the 5x playthrough and see the bonus amount added to your casino balance, you need to contact support and request that they "promote" your bonus. Then the bonus will gradually become cashable as you play it through once -- this is viewable from the Account area of the software.
|
Based on what aka posted, there is no mention of the term "promote" - and even if so, this is plainly silly. If you award a bonus, it is either sticky or it is not. It should not be "tell us you want it to be cashable" under any circumstances - not only is that not made clear, it assumes that most people do NOT want the bonus to be cashable - and I surmise that this assumption is false.
It appears to me as if the bonus designer intentionally tries to write the terms and conditions for bonuses in an obtuse manner which can then be interpreted whichever way the casino likes - that is, until someone comes to complain here in the forums, after which they suddenly backtrack.
This was the same with the last two bonuses they offered. I fell foul of one myself and determined that this was not particularly fair - but I let it go with a caveat. I can't remember the details of the second one and I'm too tired to dig it up - but again it was some sort of misinterpretation of the bonus terms and conditions.
And now this.
Whomever designed the terms and conditions must've worked for an insurance company in the past - instead of putting things in plain English, they choose to word things unclearly to give themselves space to maneuver. Maybe it's time they learned to do what other casinos are increasingly becoming aware of - Keep It Simple, Stupid!