eCOGRA Again

[Devo11]

Has the eCOGRA done anything productive for players since its inception?

All I have heard of is a bunch of cases where they take the side of the casino because duh duh duh....they are paid and funded by the casinos.

I'm assuming after this aubit they will find that it was in no way the casinos fault but a group of rogue employees whom have now been dealt with.

When will Microgaming...oh, I mean eCOGRA come out with this decision?

[Webzcas]

I really have had enough of posting here whereby I only seem to bash casinos and gambling operations, but I really must ask:

They have made a financial commitment towards the cost of the inspection.

So how about a sizable donation to GamCare or Gamblers Anon? This would in my eyes anyhow put JF back on track. I would also be very pleased to promote them again if they did this. It is called righting a wrong.

[Chatmaster]

Originally Posted by Devo11

Has the eCOGRA done anything productive for players since its inception?

All I have heard of is a bunch of cases where they take the side of the casino because duh duh duh....they are paid and funded by the casinos.

I'm assuming after this aubit they will find that it was in no way the casinos fault but a group of rogue employees whom have now been dealt with.

When will Microgaming...oh, I mean eCOGRA come out with this decision?

Can you do me a favor and point me to those posts or hard evidence where they actually sided with casinos against players?

eCOGRA is not just Microgaming,... sigh... Why do I bother?

Look eCOGRA as far as I know has done allot for players thus far. Them actually acting on the JF issue is proof of this. The way they are acting very are serious. PWC are indipendent and one of the most trusted in their industry. I certainly would like some hard proof of anything you posted here. It is clear that you have no understanding of how serious this step is for JF, I assure you it is pretty serious, almost a case of be carefull of what you ask for...

[caruso]

Originally Posted by Chatmaster

Can you do me a favor and point me to those posts or hard evidence where they actually sided with casinos against players?

Certainly.

CON: site-scrapping. No action.

CON: player a "bonus abuser": sided with casino, though casino was unquestonably in the wrong; then player amazingly popped up with a resolution coupled to a NDA. eCOGRA's only public comment was to refuse to revisit the matter because of "undisclosed" reasons.

Bella Vegas: found for the casino - almost no player support for this action. Asked Bryan Bailey when he was going to de-rogue them at the GIGSE!!

Lake Palace (old news): found for casino. Public outcry. Found for player.

Rather, chatmaster: hard evidence where they actually sided with players against casinos, without a public outcry first: can you find it? An example?

Originally Posted by Webzcas

I really have had enough of posting here whereby I only seem to bash casinos and gambling operations.

Why?? Are your postings unjustified? Unfair?

[Webzcas]

Why?? Are your postings unjustified? Unfair?

I believe not. However I am fed up with all the negativity. Never mind, I have backed England to win and win big tonight against the Swedes

[Casinomeister]

Originally Posted by Devo11

All I have heard of is a bunch of cases where they take the side of the casino because duh duh duh....they are paid and funded by the casinos...

Well, that is lame as hell. They side with the casino when the casino is in the right. And in most cases (about 99% of the time) eCOGRA has made the right decision.

I deal with complaints daily (except when I am at the beach), and these are for any xyz casino. It's no cake walk trying to figure out what's up with the player and/or the casino, but I do my damnedest to make the right decision. Even though casinos pay for advertising here, it makes no difference to me when the PAB is dealt with. Casinos have been dropped from this site - and this past year I've removed two major groups from Casinomeister. I'm not motivated by money - and most everyone knows this.

And this can be said for the folks at eCOGRA. They have set a very high standard for their casinos to meet, and more power to them. No one said these standards are perfect - just like my standards, but dammit - it's groups like eCOGRA that are getting this industry on the right track.

-15 rep points for making such a lame-ass comment.

[Casinomeister]

Originally Posted by caruso

...Bella Vegas: found for the casino - almost no player support for this action. Asked Bryan Bailey when he was going to de-rogue them at the GIGSE!!

Lest we forget, I agreed with eCOGRA's decision, but I just felt that the casino should have done something to ensure player trust - that it wasn't because of the money. That player should never have been paid, and most people felt the same way.

Andrew merely asked me when they might be removed at the GIGSE just for conversation's sake. It's an interesting thing to talk about.

[Casinomeister]

And while we're at it Caruso, if you are so anti-eCOGRA why do you promote eCOGRA approved casinos at Hundredpercentgambling.com? You list Trident and Spin Palace. Both are eCOGRA casinos (Trident was the first torchbearer BTW)

Why are you an affiliate of these two groups? Or am I mistaken somewhere?

[Casinomeister]

Originally Posted by caruso

...Bella Vegas: found for the casino - almost no player support for this action. Asked Bryan Bailey when he was going to de-rogue them at the GIGSE!!

This is written by you:
http://www.hundredpercentgambling.co...veridge-of.htm

Bella Vegas: the underage gambling issue

This relates to the matter discussed at length at the WinnerOnline forum in the Bella Vegas discussion, and about which Andrew and I exchanged emails.

Summary: Underage player deposited 17 times and cashed out three times; upon request of a substantial cash out - £13,000 GBP - she was investigated and found to be underage according to the jurisdiction she resides in, Nevada; eCOGRA, taking council from G4, recommended that the casino not pay her because of her underage status, as amongst other things this would open a whole can of worms and establish a dangerous precedent.


I don't dispute that Andrew made the "right" call on the above basis; however, my interest in re-raising this matter heads up between us was to ask if it would not have been, or yet be, possible to find a compromise that would NOT have so wholly disadvantaged the girl? Not to pay anything as a "debt" or "winnings", but to find a compromise solution, a goodwill gesture or something along these lines? There was an opportunity for quite a bit of kudos for all parties involved - could a solution not have been found?

The casino had the opportunity to make a goodwill gesture - I had suggested that the donate her winnings to a charity of her choice. That is beyond eCOGRA's scope of things. That's casino business.

[Webzcas]

Originally Posted by Casinomeister

And while we're at it Caruso, if you are so anti-eCOGRA why do you promote eCOGRA approved casinos at Hundredpercentgambling.com? You list Trident and Spin Palace. Both are eCOGRA casinos (Trident was the first torchbearer BTW)

Why are you an affiliate of these two groups? Or am I mistaken somewhere?

As it is the World Cup, I have a comment to make on CM's post.

He Shoots. He Scores