Has Rushmore Been Rogued?

[vinylweatherman]

Originally Posted by just play

Maybe Louise didn't think it was her place to talk about one of her co-workers, maybe the family problem was very bad and he didn't want it out in the open, maybe Louise didn't want to bother him in his time with his family...there could be many reasons.

Unfortunately, the problem was impacting severely on CUSTOMERS. If customers were not affected, there would be no need to reveal this kind of issue, but something NEEDED to be said because of the sheer length of time this was happening, and this made any explanations of "temporary processor problems" look like a cover up of something more serious.

Louise is not particularly high up, but it seems NO-ONE had any authority to do, or say, anything without the permission of ONE key person, the boss.

Hopefully, this thread will also get archived, and the true reason for the delays thus circulated around the net.

[uungy]

Originally Posted by Casinomeister

Umm, it's a small business - not William Hill. I think you guys are blowing this out of proportion...

Nothing to do with it. They still have unleft questions.

Personally I think it has to do with cashflow, and nothing to do with the concoction they have come up with.

Sounds like they are having financial cashflow issues, and alot of players are using Neteller, so they ban that, so they have less players depositing/cashouts, hence the reason why Neteller has been stopped for promotions.

Also the same reason why they are using lame excuses to not pay this player $2K!

They have never admitted that they have paid slowly, never apologised, and still havent come out themselves (bsides for using Bryan as their tool) to explain the reasoning

I think its a bad move putting them back, until they proove themselves, beyond doubt, its not a cashflow issue.

[vinylweatherman]

Originally Posted by uungy

Nothing to do with it. They still have unleft questions.

Personally I think it has to do with cashflow, and nothing to do with the concoction they have come up with.

Sounds like they are having financial cashflow issues, and alot of players are using Neteller, so they ban that, so they have less players depositing/cashouts, hence the reason why Neteller has been stopped for promotions.

Also the same reason why they are using lame excuses to not pay this player $2K!
They have never admitted that they have paid slowly, never apologised, and still havent come out themselves (bsides for using Bryan as their tool) to explain the reasoning

I think its a bad move putting them back, until they proove themselves, beyond doubt, its not a cashflow issue.

I thought they reviewed this, and allowed the player to have their account reinstated, and WITH the confiscated funds in it. All the player has to do is comply with documentation, and presumably they can withdraw it.
They also reopened communications with Bryan, so this supports the view that the former lack of communication was due to the one DOING the communicating being away dealing with the family issues.

The Neteller question though, has NOT been answered other than a generic "policy decision" type of answer. They need to TELL us what the problem is with Neteller, otherwise this will fuel speculation, as it seems a VERY odd decision indeed to ban a deposit method, rather than individual players, or groups of players, from the weekend and welcome bonuses.
If it were about "bonus abuse", they would ban the players involved, NOT just let them switch to credit cards, and continue "abusing" the weekend and welcome bonus. Neteller are so restrictive about which countries they will allow for gambling transactions that any player likely to have access to Neteller for gambling transactions should have no trouble finding an alternative card to use for the weekend bonus.
This ban will only make for complications with withdrawals, because bonus players who primarily use Neteller will start using BOTH; Neteller during the week, and their cards at the weekend. This means that withdrawals will be complicated by how they are allocated back to deposit methods, and this in turn will lead to players EXPECTING withdrawals in the same manner, usually back to Neteller, but receiving them in another way instead, probably by cheque, or even back to the card. They may well think upon checking their Neteller account for the money, that the old payment problems have returned, since cheques can take days, if not weeks, to arrive in the post, and cards tend to take a few days to post a refund back to the account.

[uungy]

Originally Posted by vinylweatherman

I thought they reviewed this, and allowed the player to have their account reinstated, and WITH the confiscated funds in it. All the player has to do is comply with documentation, and presumably they can withdraw it.
They also reopened communications with Bryan, so this supports the view that the former lack of communication was due to the one DOING the communicating being away dealing with the family issues.

The Neteller question though, has NOT been answered other than a generic "policy decision" type of answer. They need to TELL us what the problem is with Neteller, otherwise this will fuel speculation, as it seems a VERY odd decision indeed to ban a deposit method, rather than individual players, or groups of players, from the weekend and welcome bonuses.
If it were about "bonus abuse", they would ban the players involved, NOT just let them switch to credit cards, and continue "abusing" the weekend and welcome bonus. Neteller are so restrictive about which countries they will allow for gambling transactions that any player likely to have access to Neteller for gambling transactions should have no trouble finding an alternative card to use for the weekend bonus.
This ban will only make for complications with withdrawals, because bonus players who primarily use Neteller will start using BOTH; Neteller during the week, and their cards at the weekend. This means that withdrawals will be complicated by how they are allocated back to deposit methods, and this in turn will lead to players EXPECTING withdrawals in the same manner, usually back to Neteller, but receiving them in another way instead, probably by cheque, or even back to the card. They may well think upon checking their Neteller account for the money, that the old payment problems have returned, since cheques can take days, if not weeks, to arrive in the post, and cards tend to take a few days to post a refund back to the account.

The question is, ofcourse this one was returned, the question is if all other accounts that have been effected (I am sure there are other accunts in this situation), were they refunded.

I would like to hear a comment about it from them.

"Reopened" communication with Bryan is a start, but communicating within the forum is just as important. If they cant come up with a realistic and honest reason, then as far as I am concerened they are as cloased as they were till now.

I think they haven't proven themselves at all, and secondly, vote with your $$$$

[NASHVEGAS]

Originally Posted by uungy

...... vote with your $$$$

THIS and +1

[chuchu59]

Originally Posted by Casinomeister

Just a quick announcement that Rushmore is back on board. I spoke with the operator today, and we have a clear means of communication now.

Bryan, While I respect your decision to bring this group back on board I would have thought that they needed to earn this previlege by at least being more communicative to players rather than simply reversing a decision that is unacceptable to most.

I bear no grudges against this group but imo their behavior is a couple of notches below the standard of an accredited casino. In this industry the accredited list is the equivalent of a 'who's who' in the gaming world and definitely the cream of the crop.

[maxd]

FWIW you are incorrect to assume that this change was made solely on the grounds that they were "simply reversing a decision that is unacceptable to most." A lot of 'behind the scenes' stuff has been going on regarding this issue.

[chuchu59]

Max,

This is where the problem lies. Knowing Bryan, I am sure he has done a lot of 'donkey work' to ensure this group complies with his strict standards before it comes back on board. However, many players have not been treated well by this group in the past few months and on the face of it, it seemed that their re-accreditation came on the back of a reversal of the dubious decision to confiscate funds from a dormant account which is ridiculous.

I have never doubted either Bryan's or your integrity but surely it would be helpful to shed a little more light on how the re-accreditation came about. For casinos that newly achieve that status there are no qualms about it but given the fact that there were so many issues with Rushmore in the past few months surely it pays to be a little more transparent here on the quick re-accreditation.

[maxd]

Sorry Chu but I'm not a big fan of the "show us why we should believe you" school of website management.

I know from my PAB experience that a lot of what we do works because of the 'in between' position we hold, and a lot of that means we know things on both sides that have no place on the forums.

Doubtless Bryan will provide details as he deems appropriate but I have to say that this trend towards always asking for full disclosure seems seriously misguided to me.

The bottom line is that if we complied with these "show me" requests as often as we see them we'd probably be slitting our own throats. We simply couldn't do what we do if we hung all the laundry out in public.

[uungy]

True, and the question is why do they leave it to you to hang out their dirty laundry , cant they answer simple questions themselves, or do they need a pupet constantly

Why cant they come out themselves. They have never explained anything themselves, give you something to wonder.

I agree its speculation, but the fact they have never come clean with anything, only shows that the speculation probably has alot of truth.

Why not step up, throw them out, and let them prove themselves without you or Bryanj having to have to answer simple questions, which ought to be answered by an reputable brand. I have yet to hear Roulette69 come with a silly excuse such as this, (2 weeks for waiting withdrawals, wierd or no responses), and they are probably alot smaller than Rushmore. They make themselves sound so big, with all the different departments, (I believe its actually ALL Louise), reminds me of my post here http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...tml#post310456

Dont you feel you are getting whipped constantly because of them? They need the sling, and let them prove themselves.

Becoming accredited then losing it, should require alot more than just the original accreditation, the simple reason being that even though they were accredited, they did not do anything initially, with all their problems