Admin Note: Complaint Section

[Pinababy69]

DD99, I don't think the change is meant to stop people such as yourself from posting a complaint if you had to. It's to stop the one-hit wonders. The ones who sign up for nothing more than to post "XYZ Casino are a Bunch of Assholes"....that type of post. You've been a member here for more than two years, and have obviously posted on occasion. And you say you've never PaB...so I gave you some rep pts. That should make you fully registered (I think). Hope that's okay (with the management I mean, lol).

[Vesuvio]

Originally Posted by Da_Gambla

What's even more remarkable is, the established membership who have huge agendas rush in to judgement on posts that are so lacking in any real balanced facts, they start shouting "Pay the OP!" right off the bat. Typically, there are several such responses before Bryan sees the thread and says "Uhh.. I could use a little more info here. Could you please PAB and fill out the form entirely?"

I don't think that's the typical response from established posters. What you'll often get is people who're very experienced with these issues giving a rapid assessment, almost always with the proviso, "assuming what the poster says is true". That's a useful service, and each issue tends to help to reinforce the current state of play in the industry. Understandably Bryan's highly focussed on the individual cases, but the real value of this forum is in setting precedents and establishing a system of de-facto regulation/arbitration. The outcome of any particular case is often an irrelevance.

The recent Fortune Lounge issue is a good example. It's of no real import that some of those complaining were fraudsters - what matters is that Bryan, Jetset, Spearmaster and others have come out against bonus abuse clauses being used to deny winnings for "suspect" play patterns. Casinos have to take that into account if they value their reputation sufficiently not to want to be rogued.

[Da_Gambla]

Originally Posted by dd99

I have to agree that I don't really like this change.

I would liken it to the airlines' policy on hand luggage. The majority of us aren't out to smuggle a DIY shrapnel grenade on board, but the a%#holes who are have us all waiting in queues and having our shaving cream confiscated.

OK, not a direct parallel but the point is there. I am pissed since I have been playing online for a few years: I have to date solved all my problems myself, but as of now I can't post in the complaints board. Why ? Because I need to make another 75 posts (this being one of them. 74 to go). And until I do I presume that means I have nothing useful to contribute to a discussion about casino complaints, right ?

Well, it's not my board and I don't make the rules - nor is it a democracy - so if I don't like it I have no recourse bar either carrying on or going elsewhere....

Something may not be right with your account here... Forum rules dictate either 100 posts OR 50 Rep points and 30 days since registering. You have been here for 2 years and you have 66 rep points... I think you should be fully registered by now...??? Or what am I missing? I only have 94 posts...

- Keith

[Da_Gambla]

Originally Posted by Vesuvio

I don't think that's the typical response from established posters. What you'll often get is people who're very experienced with these issues giving a rapid assessment, almost always with the proviso, "assuming what the poster says is true".[..snip..]

I'm quite sure you are defining 'established posters' quite diffferently than I meant. To me, an established poster is one who has been involved in at least any other thread besides a complaint. In other words, a community member freely able to post, and doing so. I did not mean the responses from senior and extremely respected members. I think it goes without saying that that group of posters is seasoned enough to usually only echo what Bryan would say once he shows up, and encourage the complainant to PAB.

- Keith

[Da_Gambla]

Originally Posted by Pinababy69

DD99, I don't think the change is meant to stop people such as yourself from posting a complaint if you had to. It's to stop the one-hit wonders. The ones who sign up for nothing more than to post "XYZ Casino are a Bunch of Assholes"....that type of post. You've been a member here for more than two years, and have obviously posted on occasion. And you say you've never PaB...so I gave you some rep pts. That should make you fully registered (I think). Hope that's okay (with the management I mean, lol).

This explains away my previous post... LOL

I was flipping between this thread and the Forum rules trying to figure out why this guy wasn't fully reg'd after 2 years. You gave him the extra points and I saw 66 when I flipped back. Made me even more confused.. hehe

I think you did the right thing by him... I think Bryan should maybe add an additional way of becoming fully reg'd, because this guy was somehow short-changed. The rep stuff is cool and all, but in the end, someone has to thank your posts for it to increase substantially.

- Keith

[Vesuvio]

Originally Posted by Da_Gambla

I disagree entirely.

First, these forums will never lack in posts. They will also never lack in fully registered users who find unusual casino activities that need to be brought to a discussion.

That strikes me as hubris, or at least unduly complacent. The complaint forums are already much quieter than they used to be. Issues that would have once have provoked well-articulated responses from a wide range of members can now pass almost without comment. General expectations for casino behaviour are much lower now than they were only a year or two ago.

I'm not sure what can be done about any of that, but this current idea seems like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. It'll avoid some annoying posters (though they're not just first-timers!), but everyone's new once, and if this measure discourages even a few posters who would have gone on to be regulars, it'll have had a negative effect.

As mentioned, perhaps restricting new posters from starting threads but allowing them to post in existing ones would be a better half-way house.

[Pinababy69]

Originally Posted by Vesuvio

It'll avoid some annoying posters (though they're not just first-timers!)

I resemble that remark, lol. Actually, I try to keep my nose outta there if I can. I read, but try and comment as little as possible. Keep myself out of trouble that way.

[Da_Gambla]

Originally Posted by Vesuvio

That strikes me as hubris, or at least unduly complacent. The complaint forums are already much quieter than they used to be. Issues that would have once have provoked well-articulated responses from a wide range of members can now pass almost without comment. General expectations for casino behaviour are much lower now than they were only a year or two ago.

I'm not sure what can be done about any of that, but this current idea seems like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. It'll avoid some annoying posters (though they're not just first-timers!), but everyone's new once, and if this measure discourages even a few posters who would have gone on to be regulars, it'll have had a negative effect.

As mentioned, perhaps restricting new posters from starting threads but allowing them to post in existing ones would be a better half-way house.

Some posts are passed without comment because for the most part either the issue has been dealt with in-depth before, or the casino in question is already rogued. New users of the Forums are allowed to SEARCH, even if not allowed to post/respond in the complaint section. They can easily see where the issues were discussed in the past. Do we need to re-discuss everything every time a new poster shows up? I think most veteran posters are tired of repeating the same thing over and over to newbies who didn't know about the rogue and not-recommended lists prior to their signup and/or bad experience with a particular casino.

So, not only do they not heed a request to PAB before airing their problem publically, they also tend to not read the request to TITLE their thread carefully and SEARCH the forums for answers that may already exist. Because of this, they cost all of the long-time users of the forums a lot of energy rehashing issues.

Allowing new posters to respond to complaint threads? That's rediculous, but it's Bryan's choice. I think a sufficient amount of players around gaming message boards have established themselves as able to manipulate rules to however it seems to serve them. So instead of new threads, we just get the same "XYZ Casino are fraudulant!" embedded in ongoing threads. That would be rather productive, I guess...

- Keith

[Simmo!]

Originally Posted by Pinababy69

I resemble that remark, lol. Actually, I try to keep my nose outta there if I can. I read, but try and comment as little as possible. Keep myself out of trouble that way.

Although I moderate and am obliged to read the posts, I'm like Pina and I rarely post in there. I find the complaints forums unduly wearing at times. There is a lot more emotion in there and there are a few posters past and present that I (politely put) choose not to engage (not aimed at you by the way V). I find it interesting, but I just feel some posts/posters are designed purely to antagonise or appropriate a similar response. It's just not my scene.

PS. Da_Gambla: You may not have noticed the "Multi-Quote" button

[tennis_balls]

Originally Posted by Simmo!

but I just feel some posts/posters are designed purely to antagonise

bugger off! ya flea-bitten muppet.