Now they have an extra incentive to ban these players, since they'll be facing fines if they don't.Originally Posted by deucebag
|
|
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
mmmm, Foxy.
Achievements:
Now they have an extra incentive to ban these players, since they'll be facing fines if they don't.
Operators: If you don't know what Transparency means, then here you go.....now how about practicing it?
Transparency, as used in the humanities and in a social context more generally, implies openness, communication, and accountability. It is a metaphorical extension of the meaning a "transparent" object is one that can be seen through. ...
Experienced Member
It seems that the change they are making in the new year is that they are classifying every player as either a "fish" or a "shark", and each site on the network has to have a minimum fish/shark ratio to avoid fines.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...8&postcount=33
Their current system is based on the deposit/withdrawal ratio of their player base. Sites with more withdrawals than deposits are fined. Obviously with this system the ratio can be dramatically influenced by just a few high rollers (whether they are winning or losing), which would be unfair if their player base is otherwise balanced.
With the old system only big winners were banned, with the new system even small players are banned, at least at Victor Chandler.
The solution for a "shark" (not that I have this problem myself), is to move to one of the sites that bring fish to the network in large numbers: William Hill, Paddy Power, Bet365.
http://www.egrmagazine.com/news/2546...industry.thtml
Jasminebed (20th December 2009)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks