Lock Casino - heads up

[winbig]

What difference does it make if they(CM) are not willing to look at the evidence of the player! Such BS!!!!!!!

Which is true....I didn't know that both sides of the story and evidence weren't taken into account...

 

[slotjunkie]

If the evidence provided by the casino is conclusive and actionable what exactly is it I am supposed to ask you for? Nothing, because that's not how the process works. And there is nothing in the PAB process that should have given you any reason to believe otherwise.

Nor were you ever given any reason to believe that the evidence against you would be shared with you, again because that's not how the process works. FWIW the hard-core fraudsters are often the ones who push the hardest for this info, it's how they learn where they screwed up so they don't repeat their mistakes.

As to your promises to move heaven and earth to prove you are who you say you are I remind you that that is not and was never the issue, as previously stated (here):


As to your personal insults and groundless accusations I'll keep my opinions to myself.

That is like being fired for no good reason, filing a lawsuit, going to court and the employer gets to state their case and the judge says ok you win and the employee never gets to state their case
How is that fair????????

 

[smittytime]

Max... you CANNOT be serious!

You said "the onus is on you" to prove that I don't have multiple accounts. OKKKKKK. Well, I offered to look at my pc and check the ip address used (same one from feb when I was a "good player") YOu can check my mack address. You can check any document from me.
You still havent answered what else can I do? You never answered why it was ok for me to deposit and play from Februaury on yet they thought I was a fruadster even when they were approving my docs and taking my money?

You make no sense. The onus is on me.. yet you say there is nothing that I can do to prove it? I am offering anything and everything. Tell me what evidence you want and I'll produce it.

If the onus is on me then I am willing ready and able. Just tell me what you need.

Again, you made it sound in your last post that I was misrepresenting. Clearly either you forgot the details or were very much misrepresenting the facts.
I was not made aware of the evidence against me. I am not aware of what is going on with anything. You acted as if it were a nice, clean, transparent investigation and that I am guilty as charged.
The truth is there is no evidence and you are being a shill for that casino and throwing me and others under the bus in the process.

 

[maxd]

The truth is there is no evidence and you are being a shill for that casino and throwing me and others under the bus in the process.

If this is what you believe then I suggest you take your complaints elsewere.

I don't take action on PABs without evidence, regardless of how many times you repeat your false claims to the contrary. I don't need to ask you a blessed thing in order to decide on a case if the evidence provided by the casino is sufficient and convincing. I repeat: I do not need to ask you a blessed thing in order to decide on a case if the evidence provided by the casino is sufficient and convincing. Period. If you don't like that or insist on being consulted no matter what then, again, I suggest you find some other complaints process to pursue.

In a case like yours, where (a) both the casino and I find the evidence more than convincing enough to make a decision and (b) the OP (in this case you) insist that they are innocent I leave it up to the OP to settle the issue with the casino as best they can. I may ask the casino to have a second look at the case to be absolutely certain of their conclusions. As a courtesy to you, not that your behaviour here has warranted it, I will do this.

The bottom line is that we are not a court and we are not your defense lawyer. It is not our responsibility to prove your innocence.

Our process attempts to gather the evidence available and see if the actions being taken are reasonable in our opinion. If so, case closed. If not, we suggest what might be done about it to make it reasonable and see what progress can be made. End of story. Our service offers nothing more, or less, than this.

Please note that in particular we do not promise to evaluate your counter-argument to the casino's decision, examine whatever evidence it is that you think you have, share evidence with you, consult your opinion, or make you happy about your situation. These are all, generally speaking, beyond the scope of Pitch-A-Bitch process.

In the case that you might have evidence relevant to the case we'd probably want to see it. However in your case all that you've offered is to prove that you are who you say you are and, as explained in detail below, that is not relevant here.

The onus is on me.. yet you say there is nothing that I can do to prove it?

Another distortion of what has actually happened. I do not say any such thing. I said that proving your are who you say you are will not change the situation because your identity is not in question. Multiple accounts are the issue here: the casino has evidence that you created multiple accounts. Your proof of your identity changes nothing.

Let me put it this way: let's assume for the sake of discussion that your name is Buddy Mack. The casino has evidence that someone has created multiple accounts at the casino, one of which was created by Buddy Mack. So you file a PAB. The result comes back that yes, the casino was right to lock you and all the other accounts out, the evidence supports it. And your response is "but I am Buddy Mack! I can prove it!" So? No one said you were not Buddy Mack. Waving your identification around and repeating over and over "but I am Buddy Mack" proves absolutely nothing. The issue is the multiple accounts not whether you are Buddy Mack or not.

Contrary to your other accusations at no point in this case did I misrepresent myself, the Pitch-A-Bitch service, or this case. Everything I've said here is true and supported by the documentation I have on your case. Your accusations to the contrary are groundless and false. As to your repeated personal insults I suggest you have a look at the Forum Rules, in particular:

1.1 - No "Flaming": Please do not post any messages that harass, insult, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest. Abusive behavior will not be tolerated and your account may be suspended. ...

I am a member here too and deserve a certain degree of civil behaviour from you, or anyone else. Please attempt to argue your case without the insults and personal attacks.

I should say a few words about this idea that the casino is, or could, falsify evidence in order to forward their case against the player.

As previously mentioned this is always possible. Again, as previously mentioned, the PAB process depends on a degree of trust and honour between us and the casino.

If there is some reason to mistrust what the casino says then we usually attempt to get further evidence to cross reference against what we already have and, in this discussion, have some reason to doubt.

As it happens here we have no reason to mistrust this casino nor doubt the evidence they have provided. We've handled a number of cases with them and they have always been helpful, cooperative and forthcoming. In some cases the decision went for the casino and in others for the player. Never once have they balked at cooperating with us regardless of our decisions in the case at hand or other unrelated cases. I see no reason to start doubting them now, nor in smittytime's case specifically.

If the readership has some reason to doubt the position I have taken in this case, or any other for that matter, then contact my boss, Bryan Bailey, and let him know your concerns. If I'm mishandling things I assure you that he'll let me know what needs to be corrected.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Max... you CANNOT be serious!

You said "the onus is on you" to prove that I don't have multiple accounts. OKKKKKK. Well, I offered to look at my pc and check the ip address used (same one from feb when I was a "good player") YOu can check my mack address. You can check any document from me.
You still havent answered what else can I do? You never answered why it was ok for me to deposit and play from Februaury on yet they thought I was a fruadster even when they were approving my docs and taking my money?

You make no sense. The onus is on me.. yet you say there is nothing that I can do to prove it? I am offering anything and everything. Tell me what evidence you want and I'll produce it.

If the onus is on me then I am willing ready and able. Just tell me what you need.

Again, you made it sound in your last post that I was misrepresenting. Clearly either you forgot the details or were very much misrepresenting the facts.
I was not made aware of the evidence against me. I am not aware of what is going on with anything. You acted as if it were a nice, clean, transparent investigation and that I am guilty as charged.
The truth is there is no evidence and you are being a shill for that casino and throwing me and others under the bus in the process.

If your ISP has given you a STATIC IP address, this actually WEAKENS your case because it rules out the coincidence of other players being dynamically allocated the IP address you registered with.

The PAB process is an arbitration, not a court case, and would therefore rest on "balance of probabilities", rather than guilt "beyond reasonable doubt".

The next step IS a court case, where you WILL get to see the evidence the casino has, and be able to put your own case. This will be a CIVIL action, and again will be decided on "balance of probability".

Rather than proving your identity, you need to prove that your IP address has been misused by another person (the fraudster), and that it has nothing to do with you.

The casino is not going to be satisfied by YOU carrying out the investigation (you could fake the evidence), you will need an independent opinion from a PROFESSIONAL person that the casino will trust. This will all cost money, and will probably cost more than the amount of your win.

The information you are after is probably on the internet somewhere, since there are many forums dedicated to advantage play, and a few of these DO go further into actual fraud (multiple accounting, etc.).

Ask yourself this, "why would someone hide something that, if innocent, does not need to be kept secret".

You continue to say you can prove your identity, but is this a tactic to make us "look away" from something else about the case, the same way a magician attracts our attention so some meaningless flourish to make us look away from what he is REALLY up to in order to perform the trick.

 

[Nifty29]

FWIW the hard-core fraudsters are often the ones who push the hardest for this info, it's how they learn where they screwed up so they don't repeat their mistakes.

Spot on. Max is right when he states that the players that go around screaming about wanting the exact details are usually doing so to improve their skills when they hit the next casino.

Some members also seem to assume that Max doesnt have a brain, and that he arrived with the last milk delivery. He has seen it all I expect. If the stats say that PABs are 100% resolved in the casinos favor then yeah -call him a shill and question his motives.....but we all know that the PAB has helped many honest players receive their legitimate winnings and that includes myself. C'mon guys, give the guy some credit.

Perhaps the most important aspect of the PAB process is that it is FREE. If you don't like the way it works, or the result, then go and avail yourself of the myriad of similar FREE services on the internet (happy hunting!!).

Smittytime - Instead of running off at the mouth and insulting the person who took up your issue with Lock for FREE, why not just accept you got caught and move on? You have been told it has nothing to do with your identity, yet you gleefully continue to rant on about how you can prove who you are. Get with the program mate!

You need to get a grip and realise that:

1. You are not going to be paid.

2. You are not going to be given technical details about how your fraudulent activity was detected, and

3. You are not going to remain a member much longer if you can't show your host/s some respect.

Ive seen this time and time again and it basically boils down to whether you trust the judgement of Max or Smittytime. Personally, Ive known Max in a professional sense for 7+ years and I can gaurantee you that one this he isnt is stupid....or a liar.

(FYI I dont actually agree with the amount of slack that Lock are being cut, so before you think Im crouching behing Max, positioning my schnozz for a trip up the Hershey Highway then think again)

 

[Tengil]

Their evidence can also be as lousy as Rushmores was in "Embalu case". That did go trough here

 

[NASHVEGAS]

Their evidence can also be as lousy as Rushmores was in "Embalu case". That did go trough here

And those "bot(s) cases" that could not have possibly existed but did.

As for Max, whatever!!

 

[maxd]

The PAB process is an arbitration, not a court case, and would therefore rest on "balance of probabilities", rather than guilt "beyond reasonable doubt".

Quite so, and well said!

As for Max, whatever!!

You can't please all of the people all of the time.

As to the fouls that we've had over the years, well we never said we were perfect. But you need to keep in in perspective too. We've handled about 1000 PABs since I came on board here. How many have been known screw-ups? Ten maybe, at most I'd guess. That 1% or less of the total number of case. Double that if you want to be really conservative, say cases where we've screwed up and never known about it. So that's 2% (20 cases) of the total. Add a margin of error: say 3% or 30 cases where we made a bad decision whether it came out in the wash or not.

Now let's be really conservative and discount all the non-resolved, non-closed cases (basically the ones that never made it to the decision point for whatever reason), roughly 50% of the original 1000.

I don't know about you guys but I'd be smiling if anyone stepping up to swing for me was doing .94 (470 successful cases out of 500 that went to final decision).

Do mistakes get made? Sure they do!
Does that mean we're useless and should be mulched up and fed to the cats? What do you think the players for whom we recover about $.5M per year would say? Your call but I think the mulching might be inappropriate.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

Quite so, and well said!



You can't please all of the people all of the time.

As to the fouls that we've had over the years, well we never said we were perfect. But you need to keep in in perspective too. We've handled about 1000 PABs since I came on board here. How many have been known screw-ups? Ten maybe, at most I'd guess. That 1% or less of the total number of case. Double that if you want to be really conservative, say cases where we've screwed up and never known about it. So that's 2% (20 cases) of the total. Add a margin of error: 3% or 30 cases where we mad a bad decision whether it came out on the wash or not.

Now let's be really conservative and discount all the non-resolved, non-closed cases (basically the ones that never made it to the decision point for whatever reason), roughly 50% of the original 1000.

I don't know about you guys but I'd be smiling if anyone stepping up to swing for me was doing .94 (470 successful cases out of 500 that went to final decision).

Do mistakes get made? Sure they do!
Does that mean we're useless and should be mulched up and fed to the cats? What do you think the players for whom we recover about $.5M per year would say? Your call but I think the mulching might be inappropriate.

With the lack of transparency, your numbers are meaningless as far as I am concerned. Now I will remove myself from this thread before I am labeled a "troll".

 

[maxd]

With the lack of transparency ....

For those who are interested we publish monthly summaries, bi-annual and annual reports on the PABs here.

If anyone is curious I prepare those reports and hand them to Bryan who reviews and publishes them. So it's not a 'me' thing it's an 'us' thing.

The screw-up cases you can judge for yourself from what you see here on the forums. As you can see I've basically tripled (my guesstimate of) those in order to be fairly sure we're not low-balling the mistakes. The overall totals are drawn from memory which you can verify for yourself by looking over the annual reports.

If 'transparency' means something above and beyond these summaries and reports then it would need to be defined and taken up with Bryan, assuming you're looking for some kind of change to the way we process and report on the PABs. I'm sure this would make a worthy discussion in and of itself, perhaps in the Link Outdated / Removed forum so as to avoid a derail here.

 

[all4greed]

Is the issue with multiple accounts strictly a bonus abuse thing?

 

[love2winalot]

Is the issue with multiple accounts strictly a bonus abuse thing?

Hiya: YES, sometimes it is. I play at a casino, and have seen other casinos, that allows multiple accounts, and multiple deposit methods. They have one thing in common, in that there are NO Bonus offers of any kind.

 

[smittytime]

If your ISP has given you a STATIC IP address, this actually WEAKENS your case because it rules out the coincidence of other players being dynamically allocated the IP address you registered with.

The PAB process is an arbitration, not a court case, and would therefore rest on "balance of probabilities", rather than guilt "beyond reasonable doubt".

The next step IS a court case, where you WILL get to see the evidence the casino has, and be able to put your own case. This will be a CIVIL action, and again will be decided on "balance of probability".

Rather than proving your identity, you need to prove that your IP address has been misused by another person (the fraudster), and that it has nothing to do with you.

The casino is not going to be satisfied by YOU carrying out the investigation (you could fake the evidence), you will need an independent opinion from a PROFESSIONAL person that the casino will trust. This will all cost money, and will probably cost more than the amount of your win.

The information you are after is probably on the internet somewhere, since there are many forums dedicated to advantage play, and a few of these DO go further into actual fraud (multiple accounting, etc.).

Ask yourself this, "why would someone hide something that, if innocent, does not need to be kept secret".

You continue to say you can prove your identity, but is this a tactic to make us "look away" from something else about the case, the same way a magician attracts our attention so some meaningless flourish to make us look away from what he is REALLY up to in order to perform the trick.

Actually, there is no possible way that another person could have used my IP address. This is my point. If there was any real investigation then it would be obvious that I am the only player in the world using this IP addresss. I also am certain that no other player could use my PC. So my mac address would be totally unique also (from my understanding). So I was stating these facts as my "proof" but all of these facts are being trumped by wild allegations from a casino. I played a Blackjack bonus special on a Tuesday at Lock. Did others? Well I am sure they did as it was the Tuesday bonus. Did we all get linked when we used the Tuesday coupon? maybe. Probably. I don't know. I am not allowed to know of any "evidence" against me but I can gaurantee that nobody used my PC or my IP or my ID or my IQ or anything of mine other than me. So how am I related or have opened multiple accounts? Beats me. Have they called on a phone me or the other people? They have not talked to me directly and I assume that would be the same with all the others. So they cannot have any real solid reasons from my perspective as to call me a fraud or say I have multiple accounts. If that were the case then why did they love me in February then hate me when I won?

 

[smittytime]

Spot on. Max is right when he states that the players that go around screaming about wanting the exact details are usually doing so to improve their skills when they hit the next casino.

Some members also seem to assume that Max doesnt have a brain, and that he arrived with the last milk delivery. He has seen it all I expect. If the stats say that PABs are 100% resolved in the casinos favor then yeah -call him a shill and question his motives.....but we all know that the PAB has helped many honest players receive their legitimate winnings and that includes myself. C'mon guys, give the guy some credit.

Perhaps the most important aspect of the PAB process is that it is FREE. If you don't like the way it works, or the result, then go and avail yourself of the myriad of similar FREE services on the internet (happy hunting!!).

Smittytime - Instead of running off at the mouth and insulting the person who took up your issue with Lock for FREE, why not just accept you got caught and move on? You have been told it has nothing to do with your identity, yet you gleefully continue to rant on about how you can prove who you are. Get with the program mate!

You need to get a grip and realise that:

1. You are not going to be paid.

2. You are not going to be given technical details about how your fraudulent activity was detected, and

3. You are not going to remain a member much longer if you can't show your host/s some respect.

So then, in your vast wisdom, you are stating that I am guilty with no idea of actually what you are talking about.
Nice.
This is just like Max's perspective.
You absolutely have no idea what you are speaking about, yet you jump up on a soap box and condemn me and even ridicule me.
Nice.
That is no better than the salem witch trials.

and another thing:

I am NOT begging to know the evidence per se. What I am saying is that if I don't know why Max and the casino think that I have multiple accounts then how can I defend myself?
I have offered all of the things that I can think of to prove that I don't have multiple accounts.
1) I only have one IP address. Nobody else could use it
2) nobody else has access to my PC unless they break into my home.
3) nobody else has access to my ewallet or credit cards.
4) I have only opened one account with my name on it. I have the most common last name in the world probably but that shouldnt matter because my DOB and ID and utility bills/address should all be unique.
5) the bank account that I use to funds my ewallet is only in my name.
6) my address is not shared (i.e. apts). It is my own home.
7) I would be willing to give screen shots of my ewallet summary to show that I have only made deposits to lock casino under my name and to no other accounts. The deposit history will match up perfectly and prove that point also.
... those are the things that I can think of to prove that I don't have multiple accounts. Do you have any more ideas?
-------------------------------------------------

...and let me say that we have gotten way of track of this thread. The real issue that was going on during this thread was the disparity in treatment that lock is getting. Most are crying for them to be rogued (as they should be). Max is somehow defending them and not throwing them in the rogue pit. From an outside perspective their actions seem way more egregious than others who have been thrown there. The fact that they are not is still baffling to many of us....

 

[hitobito2005]

Smittytime, the thing is it's pretty much impossible for you to prove that you don't have multiple accounts. The onus is on the casino to prove that you do. The proof would probably be by an IP or MAC address link - although I believe some casinos have managed to get hold of P2P web wallet data in the past (debatable legality) and deduced multiple accounts from that.

There's obviously some discrepancy somewhere down the line because if what you're saying is true (fixed IP address and nobody else using computer) then proof of multiple account links would be impossible.

Perhaps you could try "gambling grumbles" if you disagree with the outcome here.

 

[Krasa]

As it happens that is not true, there is supporting evidence unrelated to e-wallets.

Yeah, let me guess - blackjack play and "betting patterns".

No offense to you, I trust you did your best... and I do not know what they provided to you, but there simply is no evidence of something that is not true.
Like my PAB said, I don't think there is much "confusion" there, it's something else, it's their financial problems.
I play from my own home and only I use this computer so unless my sister (who is 14) created another account...

FWIW the hard-core fraudsters are often the ones who push the hardest for this info, it's how they learn where they screwed up so they don't repeat their mistakes.

FWIW I got hosed for 2500$ for no reason. 700 deposit and 1800 winnings. What would anybody do other than push to get it?
That's not fair, the way you put it.. if I say nothing I'm not innocent, if I say something well of course I'm saying and "I'm pushing"... So what to do?
And who am I frauding, I joined through casinomeister's once I saw their offers and saw they're pending accreditation.

For example, I now see how you state in your replies to another user how "That wasn't the point during the PAB, nor was it what got you into trouble with Lock in the first place. The point was that you were connected strongly connected to multiple accounts and, as you were told, the onus was on you to explain this to Lock. "

I do not know about him, but I can "explain" to Lock whatever they ask me to explain. What is their "question", other than "How would you like it if we didn't pay you your winnings and kept your deposit"?

 

[Krasa]

There's obviously some discrepancy somewhere down the line because if what you're saying is true (fixed IP address and nobody else using computer) then proof of multiple account links would be impossible.

My situation is the same. MY IP isn't fixed but I am guessing chances of somebody else hitting my IP, from my same ISP, after mine has been changed AND using it to play at Lock from my country is one in a bazillion.
I will gladly give any MAC addresses or whatever else is info there to be checked. That's why I'm hoping CDS will do their job, Bryan mentioned they do deeper investigations.

 

[smittytime]

My situation is the same. MY IP isn't fixed but I am guessing chances of somebody else hitting my IP, from my same ISP, after mine has been changed AND using it to play at Lock from my country is one in a bazillion.
I will gladly give any MAC addresses or whatever else is info there to be checked. That's why I'm hoping CDS will do their job, Bryan mentioned they do deeper investigations.

yeah. I hate to break it to you but they don't. Or at least they didn't in my case. They could not have looked deeper into it or I would be declared innocent. There is no chance that they looked at ISP or MAC or anything other than just taking locks word for it. Sorry to give you that bad bit of info.

 

[takethemoney]

Guys, what can happen when you have a wireless router and it is not secure? I understand people near you can basically use your internet for free. Also, the IP ranges are going to be within an octet or two. Just saying. There are possibilies where people can be innocent.

 

[Tengil]

Keeping the deposits is borderline criminal. If you have no way of proving yourself against their accusations (that they wont specify) then its theft IMO.

Its not like you had the possibility to have your case tried in court.

 

[kavaman]

If i remember correct, there was a case about ½ year ago, where a player made a pab and it was decided on the casinos favour, but then the player provided more info and it was proven that the player was who he said he was.

What i am saying is, that the reasons for banning and not paying a player, there should be given a reason why, and the player should be informed about this. Other way around it is a bit like smittytime said "salem witch trials".
I believe players should be given a fair change to try to redeem themselves.

Im not saying if smittytime is committing fraud or not.

 

[maphesto]

Also, the IP ranges are going to be within an octet or two.

The internet IP will be the same on all computers connected to one wireless router. Inside the LAN there will be different IP:s between the computers.

 

[slotjunkie]

LOCK are FRAUDERS and very SICK and the people defending them are not well either! Why, why, why because someone is fighting hard for what is theirs they are considered a fraud with a loud bark, and a cheat who got caught!
And Nifty, you need to go wash your face(not your nose, your whole face) because it reeks of sh*t!!

And that is my first personal attack here(because this person irritates the h*ll of of me) and if that means a warning or a banning than so be it!

 

[takethemoney]

The internet IP will be the same on all computers connected to one wireless router. Inside the LAN there will be different IP:s between the computers.

You are correct and we were saying the same thing about the internet IP. Now, if a customer has been assigned a "static" IP address by their internet service provider, there would never be a different IP address and this customer could never be accused of having more than 1 account, unless the customer were just uneducated. One who understands this would have to know that even if they signed up with different usernames, different mailing addresses, birthdates, etc, in the casino's eyes they would see several user names, all coming from the same IP. A proxy, such as anonymizer could be used, but I believe those are not pingable and the casinos will generally not play, unless there is two way communication. Most people who use proxies, do so to remain completely anonymous on message boards, blogs, etc.

Now in the case of a "dynamic" IP address, at certain times the customer is assigned a new IP address or a re-lease. As an example, if I leave and go fishing in Canada for a week, I am going to shut down my PC. After a week's worth of inactivity my IP address will be recycled and a different customer will either have it or it will be available, pending future use. In a case like this, where is the proof that the casino has?

Maybe the "onus" to prove needs to be on Lock and to prove it to all of us, because frankly, Lock doesn't have many fans, nor any appreciable credibility these days. They are snakey as hell from everything I've read here and elsewhere.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

The internet IP will be the same on all computers connected to one wireless router. Inside the LAN there will be different IP:s between the computers.

Questions for Maphesto or others!!

Given the bolded situation above (and if the non-bolded also applies), can an online unequivocally determine beyond doubt that I have multiple accounts as I play on multiple computers connected to the same wireless router. If so, how??

Also if so or if not under the same scenario, could the casino have a basis to falsely accuse me of having multiple accounts??

Thanks

 

[winbig]

Questions for Maphesto or others!!

Given the bolded situation above (and if the non-bolded also applies), can an online unequivocally determine beyond doubt that I have multiple accounts as I play on multiple computers connected to the same wireless router. If so, how??

Also if so or if not under the same scenario, could the casino have a basis to falsely accuse me of having multiple accounts??

Thanks

The wireless router logs will only show what computers (and their respective MAC addresses) that are (or were) connected to the router. There's no way to prove without a shadow of a doubt that the player actually owns the computers that were connected at the time.

Now on the other hand, if you have months of logs from the router, and all of a sudden a stray MAC address pops up in the logs, never to be seen again, then I'd be inclined to believe that the router was in fact compromised.

And although text logs can be easily manipulated, then the player could view the router's log via the web interface and take screenshots from there.

 

[takethemoney]

Questions for Maphesto or others!!

Given the bolded situation above (and if the non-bolded also applies), can an online unequivocally determine beyond doubt that I have multiple accounts as I play on multiple computers connected to the same wireless router. If so, how??

Also if so or if not under the same scenario, could the casino have a basis to falsely accuse me of having multiple accounts??

Thanks

You could be falsely accused by the means you posted, as well as by what I posted. Depending on the signal strength, someone using your wireless could be doing so for up to half a mile away or so. Also, as I mentioned, what about recycled IP addresses?

 

[NASHVEGAS]

The wireless router logs will only show what computers (and their respective MAC addresses) that are (or were) connected to the router. There's no way to prove without a shadow of a doubt that the player actually owns the computers that were connected at the time.

Now on the other hand, if you have months of logs from the router, and all of a sudden a stray MAC address pops up in the logs, never to be seen again, then I'd be inclined to believe that the router was in fact compromised.

And although text logs can be easily manipulated, then the player could view the router's log via the web interface and take screenshots from there.

You could be falsely accused by the means you posted, as well as by what I posted. Depending on the signal strength, someone using your wireless could be doing so for up to half a mile away or so. Also, as I mentioned, what about recycled IP addresses?

Interesting but very Disturbing (smilie TBD)...........Thanks B and Takethemoney

 

[winbig]

You could be falsely accused by the means you posted, as well as by what I posted. Depending on the signal strength, someone using your wireless could be doing so for up to half a mile away or so. Also, as I mentioned, what about recycled IP addresses?

IP addresses, alone, should never be used in order to say that a player has duplicate accounts.

 

[all4greed]

I think a Lock manager needs to come to this thread and lay down the facts. This generic "multiple accounts" wording is bullsh*t and everyone is speculating what really went on.

At the very least, Lock management should be in contact with the player with the specifics of THEIR ALLEGATIONS.

Assuming the player is innocent, this really shows that the casino has the final word without having to explain their decision. Fair gaming my @ss.

 

[winbig]

If the OP (or anyone else accused of multiple accounts) really wanted to push the issue, then I feel that Lock should at least open up the logs relevant to this case to a 3rd party, that the player pays themselves and the casino agrees to, that is experienced in both computer and network forensics. That way they can have an unbiased review of what exactly happened, and figure out if the player is indeed telling the truth about only having one account.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Of course this is sensitive information, but that could be protected by having any 3rd party sign a NDA.

 

[all4greed]

If the OP (or anyone else accused of multiple accounts) really wanted to push the issue, then I feel that Lock should at least open up the logs relevant to this case to a 3rd party, that the player pays themselves and the casino agrees to, that is experienced in both computer and network forensics. That way they can have an unbiased review of what exactly happened, and figure out if the player is indeed telling the truth about only having one account.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Of course this is sensitive information, but that could be protected by having any 3rd party sign a NDA.

Good idea. However, the casino should pay for it, not the player. The player and casino should agree on the company that does the investigation.

The player shouldn't be out any more money...

Edit: WTH was I thinking? This casino has serious money problems and can't even pay other customers!

 

[winbig]

Good idea. However, the casino should pay for it, not the player. The player and casino should agree on the company that does the investigation.

The player shouldn't be out any more money...

True. If the player is found innocent, then of course Lock should pay any fees that the player is out of pocket to prove their innocence.

 

[all4greed]

True. If the player is found innocent, then of course Lock should pay any fees that the player is out of pocket to prove their innocence.

That's reasonable...

 

[Nifty29]

So then, in your vast wisdom, you are stating that I am guilty with no idea of actually what you are talking about.
Nice.
This is just like Max's perspective.
You absolutely have no idea what you are speaking about, yet you jump up on a soap box and condemn me and even ridicule me.
Nice.
That is no better than the salem witch trials.

You are right in one sense - I dont know the facts, but Max does....and I do know what Im talking about when I say that he knows what he is talking about.

Oh and the difference between this and the Salem Witch Trials? The accused in Salem were not witches.

LOCK are FRAUDERS and very SICK and the people defending them are not well either! Why, why, why because someone is fighting hard for what is theirs they are considered a fraud with a loud bark, and a cheat who got caught!

How can a casino be 'sick', and what the hell is a 'frauder'??

I can only speak for myself here, but I am not defending Lock - I am defending the integrity of the PAB process.

The PAB process gets it right at least 95% of the time (closer to 99% actually), so who would you put your money on????

And Nifty, you need to go wash your face(not your nose, your whole face) because it reeks of sh*t!!

And that is my first personal attack here(because this person irritates the h*ll of of me) and if that means a warning or a banning than so be it!

Umm....ok...and here I was thinking we were such good friends. :sob:

 

[tbear]

BIG PROBLEM

I have emailed them 6-8 times. They locked me out of the site owing me 3000. No response to emails or CDS. tried logging in to Lock.com which give me live chat but no response either. over 3 months now.

 

[takethemoney]

I have emailed them 6-8 times. They locked me out of the site owing me 3000. No response to emails or CDS. tried logging in to Lock.com which give me live chat but no response either. over 3 months now.

Sorry to hear it & does this surprise anyone at this point?
Now that this is out, what have you got in the way of proof that they owe you money? File a PAB and maybe Max can help you get your money, if Lock is already not causing his plate to fill up.

 

[all4greed]

Anyone want to bet when they will close shop and flee?

My bet is end of September.

 

[takethemoney]

Anyone want to bet when they will close shop and flee?

My bet is end of September.

Sept 6th, 2010, but they will happily take your deposits through the preceeding weekend.

 

[binshakindown]

IP's are like shapes

not DNA evidence. The probability of one idiot using the same internet connection, router with cloned MAC and computer for multiple accounts is an enormously super high probability as compared to the smallest chance that your neighbor is using a similar IP at the same casino.

Very simple really. Remember, I didn't say every, all, never, can't.........etc.

 

[maxd]

I'd like to remind other readers that this discussion about IPs is largely based on the assumption that IP data is the casino's primary source of evidence in this (smittytime's) case. That assumption is quite wrong.

The casino and we here at Casinomeister are well aware that IP evidence can be helpful, but seldom conclusive. These days casinos rarely take action on IP evidence alone, they almost always seek other data to confirm or deny their suspicions.

 

[4 of a kind]

Max,

I think most here would agree you proved your point well.

How are they doing with payments?

 

[maxd]

How are they doing with payments?

I've largely been chasing other issues this week so I couldn't say for certain, but I haven't exactly been flooded with "thanks, I got paid!" messages lately. I'll be asking them for updates on the outstanding issues early next week.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I'd like to remind other readers that this discussion about IPs is largely based on the assumption that IP data is the casino's primary source of evidence in this (smittytime's) case. That assumption is quite wrong.

The casino and we here at Casinomeister are well aware that IP evidence can be helpful, but seldom conclusive. These days casinos rarely take action on IP evidence alone, they almost always seek other data to confirm or deny their suspicions.

Well, the OP has stated that his IP address is static, and that it is "impossible" for anyone but himself to have used it. In this case, if Lock have more than one account registered from the OP's IP address, by his own admission they are all his.

The main thing that makes me think a mistake was made is the fact that the OP was playing at lock, depositing and withdrawing fine, documents fully verified, and then they claim he is a fraud after a big win.

Either he is a clever fraud, and it took Lock this long to find out, or Lock have made a mistake, perhaps confusing his data with that of another player. This was the explanation I got from the Spin Palace rep when they investigated me after I had been there for years. Someone had mixed me up with a newer player, and created a spurious connection between us on the database. This is a very COMMON mistake made by "big business" and government. Even DNA is not "unique" when used in criminal cases. Apart from identical twins, the tests give a "1 in 4 million" probability that the match was by chance, but the possibility exists.
Now, what is the probability that the data matches used to determine fraud are made "by chance" due to the lack of uniqueness of the data sets used?

Another thought, given how clever fraudsters are, how many players busted for fraud are VICTIMS of these other clever fraudsters, rather than fraudsters themselves. When it comes to ID checks for example, what happens when a fraudster steals an ID and uses it at a casino, and THEN the genuine owner of that ID signs up there. Can the casino determine who is the fraudster, and who is the genuine player, or is it simply a case of "first come, first served".
Given that ID theft has increased, and often the LAST person to find out is the victim themselves, how are we to know whether professional multiple accounters are using our IDs to play online, perhaps banking on the fact that 95% of the fake IDs they use will NEVER be used to gamble online by their owners.

 

[racefanrob]

I was kicked out of Lock as I stated before for having multiple accounts. That is just stupid. I know for a fact that I didn't have multiple accounts and I believe the OP who has PM'd me looking for explanations.
Bottom line is that I feel insulted because of Nifty and Max. Max is just so sure that the OP is guilty that I am sure he believes that i am too. Nifty is like a little lady cheerleader for max who is not only very likely wrong but being smarmy about it also.
I don't give a rats behind about Lock casino because I lost. I am angry because basically I would be considered guilty here also. What a crock of crap this all is. I am embarrassed for anyone taking lock's side in this. How odd it is that they all the sudden start locking accounts and they also cant pay the other accounts that they don't lock out. Hmmmmmmmm. The fact that they are not rogued yet and continue to be defended and have their word mean more than players who are members here is gross.
I am actually surprised at the level of calmness the victims are showing here as max and nifty scream GUILTY while all the evidence points otherwise. At least the evidence that we are allowed to see.
If there is ever a real investigation into this then I will be willing to share my ISP and mac address also to help out.

RIP lock. You have no credibility left and your taking the credibility of your backers too. Good job.

 

[jelsmith]

Anyone want to bet when they will close shop and flee?

My bet is end of September.

Its right around the corner for sure. I just feel bad for unsuspecting players who are unaware of this and/or other forums. Lock is simply scraping in deposits and I highly doubt they are even playing recent winners. They will snatch up as much as they can then disappear and player funds along with them....

 

[Nifty29]

Nifty is like a little lady cheerleader for max who is not only very likely wrong but being smarmy about it also.

and nifty scream GUILTY while all the evidence points otherwise.

I said that I trust Max's judgement, and that is a 98%+ bet based on past history. I'll take those odds anyday against some blow-in. Considering these kinds of stats, It is amazing to see how many of the same people always side with the player when they almost never proven innocent in fraud-related matters.

"We cant see the evidence..blah blah blah"....well of course we cant. Only one person has seen it - Max. So, it comes down to whether you rate Max's credibility....and some of you (continually) do not. Bryan trusts Max, so it follows if you dont trust Max then you dont trust Bryan.....so why the hell would you want to hang around a site where you dont trust the people who run it???

 

[Tengil]

The more I think about them confiscating even the deposits the more "criminal" they get. Its so much more severe than just confiscating winnings.

That cant be legal? Isnt it pure and simple theft? Edit: almost forgot its an online casino, they do what they want

And they wont go under as long as they have a horde of affiliates promoting them.

 

[Pulver]

Just to give you an update on my case:

I received $740 on the 10th of August and then I received $650 on the 25th of August. As you can see money are comming in now and then, but not in large amounts and not every week.


Total received is now $6910 out of $19600.


Angry inside, but what does it help? They are still communicating with me tho.