slotocash voided 12,400 win

[ksech]

Okay, IF star12wars had caught his/her mistake by the 23rd spin like casinobuzz had (in reference to the other slotocash thread) perhaps he/she would have been offered the same "deal" casinobuzz was offered. Would that have made a difference to those crying foulplay by the casino? There is a BIG difference between 23 spins and 177 spins, and I think Ms Sloto did right by giving casinobuzz a chance to redeem themselves by having another go at it (even though they now have another WR they must meet). Ms Sloto has stated star12wars was given ALL of their deposits back (which seems more than fair to me, Slotocash could have only given him/her this singular deposit back).

star12wars, is pulling information from other members posts, using THAT information as if it is their own. He/she has changed their 'story' as they deemed fit, adding to and then deleting as deemed fit, to adhere to the emotional tension of the day. He/she only wants to 'hear' what he/she wants to hear/see and I'm truly beginning to think he/she is enjoying all the headbutting that is going on. He/she is playing the sympathy card and is probably thinking if he/she keeps at it the casino will just relent and pay him/her to just drop it.

As far as I know, SlotoCash isn't even an accredited casino here, but neither is it a rogue. SlotoCash has a rep who actually TRIES to resolve problems unlike some of the accredited casinos who have reps who can't be bothered to reply to threads (and/or PMs) involving problems with their casinos. As I stated before, when/if legislation is passed, Slotocash is on my short list of those I would try again. There are much more 'evil' good casinos out there right now, IMO.

[Jasminebed]

While I would have preferred to see the player given additional wagering, I am satisfied with his deposit being returned, and all his deposits returned may be a better resolution than a chance to meet additional wagering. I think they were only obligated to return the deposit for the play in question, so the others were in fact a goodwill gesture.

Perhaps someone can confirm that if additional wagering penalty is now part of the terms for future violations of the max bet rule?

I hope Ms Sloto lets us know when the RJ has been returned. Then it's fork time IMO.

[LaHutti]

Okay, IF star12wars had caught his/her mistake by the 23rd spin like casinobuzz had (in reference to the other slotocash thread) perhaps he/she would have been offered the same "deal" casinobuzz was offered. Would that have made a difference to those crying foulplay by the casino? There is a BIG difference between 23 spins and 177 spins, and I think Ms Sloto did right by giving casinobuzz a chance to redeem themselves by having another go at it (even though they now have another WR they must meet). Ms Sloto has stated star12wars was given ALL of their deposits back (which seems more than fair to me, Slotocash could have only given him/her this singular deposit back).

star12wars, is pulling information from other members posts, using THAT information as if it is their own. He/she has changed their 'story' as they deemed fit, adding to and then deleting as deemed fit, to adhere to the emotional tension of the day. He/she only wants to 'hear' what he/she wants to hear/see and I'm truly beginning to think he/she is enjoying all the headbutting that is going on. He/she is playing the sympathy card and is probably thinking if he/she keeps at it the casino will just relent and pay him/her to just drop it.

As far as I know, SlotoCash isn't even an accredited casino here, but neither is it a rogue. SlotoCash has a rep who actually TRIES to resolve problems unlike some of the accredited casinos who have reps who can't be bothered to reply to threads (and/or PMs) involving problems with their casinos. As I stated before, when/if legislation is passed, Slotocash is on my short list of those I would try again. There are much more 'evil' good casinos out there right now, IMO.

I'll try to explain my stand on this once again.
This, to me, is not so much about this one player, who, in my opinion, SHOULD have been paid, minus whatever gain he got from the $20 spins, and possibly some extra playthrough, as a penalty (If that's even fair, since he did nothing wrong in my opinion....the software did wrong, by letting him do $20 spins, when the casino doesn't want him to do that).

This is about the basic fact, that casinos come up with all this bullshit, ONLY to trap players, and not pay them when they finally win (Which doesn't happen often), and get away with it.
The software....all of it, including the bonus parts, has been designed, not by the players but by, in this case, RTG and if the players can't simply press "spin" or "autoplay"..... which are both parts of the software....and get bloody paid, if the software says they won, then something is basicly wrong with the software. Nobody can deny that.
Nor can anyone deny, that the software is solely RTG'S responsibillity, and the casino CHOSE to run a software with apparent basic problems. It's the casinos responsibillity, to demand that the software is working the way they want it, OR only offer what the software can do.
Never can it be the players responsibillity, but in every case, the player gets to pay the bill, and in this case a pretty expensive one. THAT is my problem in this case, and too many others.
My next problem is, that normal players (I assume ?), who could get trapped next, openly and publicly support this kind of bs, telling the casinos, that this is acceptable. ???

[ksech]

okay, another 'naive' question(s)...
I know each casino contributes a certain amount of "seed" money towards the RJ. How is this contribution put in there, meaning...Does the casino have access to put this seed money directly into the RJ pot or do they have to set up some type of account with RTG (where RTG pulls money out and then funds the RJ)? Am I confusing anyone else besides myself yet??? If it is up to RTG to return the money to the RJ, then shouldn't everyone be upset with RTG instead of Slotocash for the delay in the return of RJ funds if Slotocash has returned the winnings BACK to RTG?


*Good grief, no wonder I give myself headaches all the time...*

[ksech]

So what you are basically saying is, the player doesn't ever need to take ANY responsibility because...
A) RTG software is designed to "trap" players.
B) Any casino who uses RTG software should be rogued because they know RTG software is 'rigged', yet they 'CHOOSE' to continue using it.
C) Any player who uses a bonus while playing at an RTG casino, who fails to abide by the T&Cs, should be paid anyways...because it's the casinos fault because they chose to use a software which will allow the player to void max bet rules, play games not allowed, etc.

Did I get that right?


Of all the people in the cyberworld who play at this online casino (or at least the ones here at CM), should they just start ignoring the T&Cs? Start a thread/complaint, letting it turn into a 20+ page bash-the-casino/casino rep-thread hoping that they get paid because it's NOT their responsibility to follow the rules? Tell me, when DOES it become the players' responsibility? If by your logic (at least from my interpretation of it) the player should NEVER have to assume responsibility, there shouldn't be ANY rules, and everyone should ALWAYS get paid no matter what...

[LaHutti]

So what you are basically saying is, the player doesn't ever need to take ANY responsibility because...
A) RTG software is designed to "trap" players.
B) Any casino who uses RTG software should be rogued because they know RTG software is 'rigged', yet they 'CHOOSE' to continue using it.
C) Any player who uses a bonus while playing at an RTG casino, who fails to abide by the T&Cs, should be paid anyways...because it's the casinos fault because they chose to use a software which will allow the player to void max bet rules, play games not allowed, etc.

Did I get that right?


Of all the people in the cyberworld who play at this online casino (or at least the ones here at CM), should they just start ignoring the T&Cs? Start a thread/complaint, letting it turn into a 20+ page bash-the-casino/casino rep-thread hoping that they get paid because it's NOT their responsibility to follow the rules? Tell me, when DOES it become the players' responsibility? If by your logic (at least from my interpretation of it) the player should NEVER have to assume responsibility, there shouldn't be ANY rules, and everyone should ALWAYS get paid no matter what...

No....the players should NOT do all of those things.
The CASINOS should start doing, what the casinos that won CM awards year after year after year, is doing. that would solve all of these problems.
What the players should do....imho...is stop playing in casinos, that can't get basic things straight, and not support these outfits, by telling everyone, that it's ok, that they can't do it, because a few actually CAN do it, and prove it over and over.
I don't know where you got the rigged part from ...it wasn't from me

[ksech]

I concede on "rigged", is "buggy" better? I'm not really siding, per se, with the casino on this, and yes there ARE much better outfits out there who ARE doing it right (US players just don't have all the benefits of playing at some of those wonderful outfits as others do). BUT, IF this player HAD played by the rules, and had cashed out...have there been any threads of complaints of withdrawal delays from this casino? Of CSR giving players the run around on pending withdrawals? No response from the casino rep to PMs? No response from the casino rep to casino issues in threads? It seems as if THOSE are some of the bigger issues for players right now.

[vinylweatherman]

Okay, IF star12wars had caught his/her mistake by the 23rd spin like casinobuzz had (in reference to the other slotocash thread) perhaps he/she would have been offered the same "deal" casinobuzz was offered. Would that have made a difference to those crying foulplay by the casino? There is a BIG difference between 23 spins and 177 spins, and I think Ms Sloto did right by giving casinobuzz a chance to redeem themselves by having another go at it (even though they now have another WR they must meet). Ms Sloto has stated star12wars was given ALL of their deposits back (which seems more than fair to me, Slotocash could have only given him/her this singular deposit back).

star12wars, is pulling information from other members posts, using THAT information as if it is their own. He/she has changed their 'story' as they deemed fit, adding to and then deleting as deemed fit, to adhere to the emotional tension of the day. He/she only wants to 'hear' what he/she wants to hear/see and I'm truly beginning to think he/she is enjoying all the headbutting that is going on. He/she is playing the sympathy card and is probably thinking if he/she keeps at it the casino will just relent and pay him/her to just drop it.

As far as I know, SlotoCash isn't even an accredited casino here, but neither is it a rogue. SlotoCash has a rep who actually TRIES to resolve problems unlike some of the accredited casinos who have reps who can't be bothered to reply to threads (and/or PMs) involving problems with their casinos. As I stated before, when/if legislation is passed, Slotocash is on my short list of those I would try again. There are much more 'evil' good casinos out there right now, IMO.

Exactly. I spotted that he agreed with my latest timeline of what happend without question, stating that he set the autoplay to 500 spins, and "must have wagered 10K" because when he came back all 500 spins must have been played out.

Unfortunately, in his haste he forgot that earlier on he published the playlogs This was an earlier attempt to garner sympathy, but one that was used with a different background story.

Clearly, he had no bonus rounds in those 500 spins, yet according to Ms Sloto, he made a "substantial gain" from 177 spins at $20. he brushed aside the discrepancy by putting words into Ms Sloto's mouth, stating that when she wrote 177, she was only counting those spins that were made when the WR was incomplete - pity the number should have been 175 in this case, and apart from this, I am sure Ms Sloto would have made it clear that she meant 177 spins with the bonus active, and xxx spins after, rather than just stating 177.

An alternative theory is that these spins were intentionally set at $20 in order to "hurry up" the remaining WR and withdraw quickly. Perhaps hoping that since the big hit itself was "legit", these spins would not be checked into, and the cashin would be nodded through as this was his 6th deposit, rather than his first.

The first story was complete denial, but this was later changed to a pretty detailed account of how he forgot to check the settings, and discovered the mistake upon his return.

It is a shame that the playlogs are just a long line of text, rather than a neat table. It is hard to see where one transaction ends, and another begins, and a spreadsheet cannot be used to run stats on the log. MGS is almost as bad, you can check every transaction, but it is near impossible to get a session into a spreadsheet. However, one thing I saw was that after a spell of $20 spins, the error was noticed, and lower bets were then being made. This does not fit the "must have done 10K of wagering" after which followed the cashin.

Being offered additional wagering was only a possible goodwill gesture, not something the casino would be required to do in order to stay out of the pit. We also don't know whether the OP had prior "form" with Sloto under Rival, under Desert Nights, or managed to appeal an appearance on the Rival bonus ban database in order to get these boni from Sloto.

This issue aside, pressure still needs to be put onto the software suppliers to include proper measures to protect players from their own mistakes, which would also have the benefit of making it harder for scheming players to "slip one under the radar" by exploiting weaknesses in the audit process used to determine whether terms have been complied with.

[chayton]

Just a quick (slightly OT) question. If you take a bonus at MG and there are limitations to games you can play, does the software keep you from being able to play those games? I don't really pay attention since I mostly play slots and usually those are covered.

[Seventh777]

Just a quick (slightly OT) question. If you take a bonus at MG and there are limitations to games you can play, does the software keep you from being able to play those games? I don't really pay attention since I mostly play slots and usually those are covered.

Nope, as these games differ from casino to casino, for eg you can play the new multi reel BDBA at 32Red (I rang them up just to confirm this as a free phone call is better than losing a few grand right ) and i`m pretty sure you cannot play multi reel games at some other MG`s.