krino VS GoWild

[Nifty29]

No surprises once again.

You can pick 'em a mile away.

 

[jetset]

It's sort of entertaining seeing them exposed, but the persistence of these fraudsters gets a little tiresome.

 

[Seventh777]

No surprises once again.

You can pick 'em a mile away.

QFT, I would have got away with it if it wasn`t for those pesky IP`s

 

[Casinomeister]

It's sort of entertaining seeing them exposed, but the persistence of these fraudsters gets a little tiresome.

Actually, I don't mind dealing with these guys so much. We get a glimpse on how the casinos battle this - which just makes our collective knowledge base stronger.

But yeah, it gets a little tiresome.

 

[maxd]

AFAIC the most tiresome thing is that the rhetoric never changes. They are always as innocent as the baby Jesus (self-proclaimed), and it's IMPOSSIBLE for blah and blah-blah to have happened, and they're as misunderstood as .. some badly misunderstood guy.

Sometimes it seems as if they get handed the Junior Fraudster Booklet when they sign on and never recite anything but the contents thereof.

Boundless energy and no imagination: now THAT'S tiresome. Other than that it can be a hoot.

 

[chuchu59]

AFAIC the most tiresome thing is that the rhetoric never changes. They are always as innocent as the baby Jesus (self-proclaimed), and it's IMPOSSIBLE for blah and blah-blah to have happened, and they're as misunderstood as .. some badly misunderstood guy.

Sometimes it seems as if they get handed the Junior Fraudster Booklet when they sign on and never recite anything but the contents thereof.

Boundless energy and no imagination: now THAT'S tiresome. Other than that it can be a hoot.

Its tiring Max. You devote time and energy to these issues as normally you give them the benefit of the doubt before proceeding. They have nothing to lose but their time but in case you slip up they get a windfall. Actually, I want to PAB having just won a RJ of $3K (3 Stooges II) at Grande Vegas From a live raffle free chip. This sucks as its the first time in a while that I am playing a ND free chip. You are going to entertain my PAB arent you?

 

[Mousey]

I have a question and please don't beat me up for asking I know most of you guys have been around for a long time here and have gambled online for a long while too and have heard a lot of stories. However with that being said, in so many of the forum topics where a player has came in with a problem it seems that a few have him or her tagged as a "fraudster"...why is this? Just because people in the past may have been shady doesn't mean that every person is. It's like labeling. I guess because I am almost finished with my PhD in Forensic Psychology I have to have information/proof from all sides. I understand that so many of these people are not on the up and up but what about those that are? In the forum some almost immediately start questioning and making comments to the player that is almost presumptious of the person being wrong. It's only fair to say that casinos ate made up of normal people just like all of us and mistakes can be made. My point to this....regardless of rules and regulations set up by casinos, certain criterion should be mandatory before any funds could be seized, and even in the event of seizure, arbitration should be available for the protection of all parties on both sides. This is just my opinion of course. Since Brian has this mobile ap for my phone I have posted more than I ever have because of the simplicity and it's at my fingertips...love it Anyway, just voicing my thoughts.

I think Forensic Psych is a great subject to study! Rather than 'labeling'.... I consider what we do here as ... hmmm... maybe it's closer to profiling? And remember that most of us who jump into these discussions have been here a long, long time and have seen so much of the same/similar thing with similar results. Bryan gave the guy a second chance... but same results. Do we give them the benefit of the doubt? Usually. But that doesn't mean we offer them tea and cookies till it's sorted. We want background info, the details of how/what, etc.... They post here, they've opened themselves up to ... well... interrogation. LOL

I have come to the conclusion that there are many lowlifes out there that make their living by setting up bogus accounts, sometimes syndicating money, and playing bonuses at online casinos.

Do the casinos get it wrong sometimes? Yes, but not very often. Do 'we' get it wrong sometimes? Yes, but not very often. As you pay more attention to these type threads you'll see the commonality....

 

[Simmo!]

It's not only tiresome but it's thanks to these chancers that bonuses are basically now little more than deposit traps and every player who takes one is treated to stringent checks. Still, why online casinos prey on people's greed they have to roll with it too. Just seems it does no-one any favours.

 

[maxd]

... bonuses are basically now little more than deposit traps ... Just seems it does no-one any favours.

Amen to that. If you removed bonus cases from the complaints process I'd pretty much be out of a job! It's more or less _because_ of bonuses that the PAB process is kept busy 365 days a year.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Amen to that. If you removed bonus cases from the complaints process I'd pretty much be out of a job! It's more or less _because_ of bonuses that the PAB process is kept busy 365 days a year.

This, surely, is an argument for taking the issue more seriously through more robust preventative measures being designed into the software. This would make many of the situations leading to such complaints impossible. There would be no arguments about invalid bets as a percantage of bonus, no play on disallowed games. Players would have to make a REAL effort to break the SOFTWARE before they could break the terms. This would leave only the more creative cases, such as multi-accounting, fake documents, etc. Fewer cases means less costs in dealing with them, and less bad PR when such players let rip on the forums.

There would be MORE complaints about accounts getting locked the moment they are created, and players complaining that their max bet has been set too low in the software. Importantly, these cases would involve refusal to accept bets, rather than voiding of bets and winnings at the time of withdrawal. This would create far less negative PR for the casinos.

 

[KasinoKing]

This, surely, is an argument for taking the issue more seriously through more robust preventative measures being designed into the software. This would make many of the situations leading to such complaints impossible. There would be no arguments about invalid bets as a percentage of bonus, no play on disallowed games. Players would have to make a REAL effort to break the SOFTWARE before they could break the terms. This would leave only the more creative cases, such as multi-accounting, fake documents, etc. Fewer cases means less costs in dealing with them, and less bad PR when such players let rip on the forums.

There would be MORE complaints about accounts getting locked the moment they are created, and players complaining that their max bet has been set too low in the software. Importantly, these cases would involve refusal to accept bets, rather than voiding of bets and winnings at the time of withdrawal. This would create far less negative PR for the casinos.

Yes... but we all KNOW why the casinos wont use the software.
And sadly, the reason is greed

If an advantage player has a go at a bonus and loses, the casino keeps his money - even if he did break one of the T&Cs!
(You NEVER hear of a casino saying "Ooops, you broke one of our T&Cs while busting out - here's your deposit back!)
But if he wins and broke one of the T&Cs the casino does not have to pay him any winnings - just return his deposit.

KK

 

[vinylweatherman]

Yes... but we all KNOW why the casinos wont use the software.
And sadly, the reason is greed

If an advantage player has a go at a bonus and loses, the casino keeps his money - even if he did break one of the T&Cs!
(You NEVER hear of a casino saying "Ooops, you broke one of our T&Cs while busting out - here's your deposit back!)
But if he wins and broke one of the T&Cs the casino does not have to pay him any winnings - just return his deposit.

KK

Quite, so when complaints about bonuses create bad PR, casinos only have themselves to blame for not acting to ensure the issues don't occur in the first place.

 

[Seventh777]

Yes... but we all KNOW why the casinos wont use the software.
And sadly, the reason is greed

If an advantage player has a go at a bonus and loses, the casino keeps his money - even if he did break one of the T&Cs!
(You NEVER hear of a casino saying "Ooops, you broke one of our T&Cs while busting out - here's your deposit back!)
But if he wins and broke one of the T&Cs the casino does not have to pay him any winnings - just return his deposit.

KK

What has this case (fraud) got to do with advantage players?.

 

[KasinoKing]

What has this case (fraud) got to do with advantage players?.

I was just responding to Vinylweatherman's post, I was not specifically referring to this case.

As I understand it from what Casinomeister wrote, this case was fraud used to open multiple accounts.
Legitimate players don't open multiple accounts - only people looking to take advantage of the casinos bonuses over and over again.

There is nothing wrong with advantage players who only have one account at each casino (if there was I would be in trouble myself!), but there is a LOT wrong with advantage players trying basically to defraud the casinos by creating multiple accounts.

KK

 

[Seventh777]

I was just responding to Vinylweatherman's post, I was not specifically referring to this case.

As I understand it from what Casinomeister wrote, this case was fraud used to open multiple accounts.
Legitimate players don't open multiple accounts - only people looking to take advantage of the casinos bonuses over and over again.

There is nothing wrong with advantage players who only have one account at each casino (if there was I would be in trouble myself!), but there is a LOT wrong with advantage players trying basically to defraud the casinos by creating multiple accounts.

KK

Ah I see, you should use a different name for them, like one of those cockernee rhyming slang ones, merchant bankers springs to mind .

 

[chuchu59]

I was just responding to Vinylweatherman's post, I was not specifically referring to this case.

As I understand it from what Casinomeister wrote, this case was fraud used to open multiple accounts.
Legitimate players don't open multiple accounts - only people looking to take advantage of the casinos bonuses over and over again.

There is nothing wrong with advantage players who only have one account at each casino (if there was I would be in trouble myself!), but there is a LOT wrong with advantage players trying basically to defraud the casinos by creating multiple accounts.

KK

Sometimes, after a gap of several years, you pay one of the casinos you havent frequented for a long time a visit and open a new account. Frankly, as long as no 2 bonuses of the same are claimed 'multiple accounts ' should not be a reason for confiscation of winnings. IMO multiple accounts do not necessarily amount to fraud for this very reason.

 

[Seventh777]

Sometimes, after a gap of several years, you pay one of the casinos you havent frequented for a long time a visit and open a new account. Frankly, as long as no 2 bonuses of the same are claimed 'multiple accounts ' should not be a reason for confiscation of winnings. IMO multiple accounts do not necessarily amount to fraud for this very reason.

Agree 100%, but, it would then create more confusion as there would be none fraudulent offences stemming from ones that are offences, for basically the same offence.

 

[Mousey]

Sometimes, after a gap of several years, you pay one of the casinos you havent frequented for a long time a visit and open a new account. Frankly, as long as no 2 bonuses of the same are claimed 'multiple accounts ' should not be a reason for confiscation of winnings. IMO multiple accounts do not necessarily amount to fraud for this very reason.

Seems that many casinos use the term 'active accounts'. Which is good to know because there may be some out there that I don't remember signing up. But I'm rather paranoid about it, so I always email the casino before I sign up just to be sure I don't already have an account. LOL But it does happen....

 

[chuchu59]

Seems that many casinos use the term 'active accounts'. Which is good to know because there may be some out there that I don't remember signing up. But I'm rather paranoid about it, so I always email the casino before I sign up just to be sure I don't already have an account. LOL But it does happen....

With the MG Viper software you can retrieve all your old accounts info so that's ok with me. I havent come accross a casino using the term 'active account' though.

 

[Mousey]

With the MG Viper software you can retrieve all your old accounts info so that's ok with me. I havent come accross a casino using the term 'active account' though.

I can't remember where I read 'a player can have only one active account' recently.... probably an RTG ... if I can find it again I'll post the link.

 

[chayton]

AFAIC the most tiresome thing is that the rhetoric never changes. They are always as innocent as the baby Jesus (self-proclaimed), and it's IMPOSSIBLE for blah and blah-blah to have happened, and they're as misunderstood as .. some badly misunderstood guy.

It seems that the fraudsters proclaim their innocence a lot longer and louder than normal players. It kind of sucks though because if someone becomes a member here and right away has a complaint that a casino is calling them a fraudster, my first assumption is that they are. Am I getting jaded? OMG am I turning into Nifty?

 

[petro]

krino: "...because I am the only one in this house who has ever played at your casino..."

I find it odd that this guy repeatedly refers to "this house."
It is like he is saying that multi-accounting is fine if it's done at different houses.