pamper spams

[Alexishot69]

Hi
i am new to the forum and will put a thread in the introduce yourself bit shortly anyhow found this site last night and pretty glad i did to be honest..i generally stick to UK based poker and casinos and only generally play for smallish stakes.I typed into gogle good casinos bonuses or something similar a week ago and found pamper casino and duly signed up for there "free" 100 usd no deposit which i quickly lost unlike some other free ND bonuses where you usually win ...lol..however ive started recieving emails from pamper on a daily basis and the latest one is absolutely incredible offering a 2050% bonus and they are getting bigger everyday.Now the reason i found casinomeister was typing pamper casino into google and just as i thought a rogue mob.so Big thnx to CM and for what its worth ill post the email down below....A x

Dear xxxx xxxxxxxx,

2050% bonus just for you! Available now in the cashier.

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

Your username at Pamper Casino is : xxxxxxx
Your password at Pamper Casino is : xxxxxxx

2050% bonus on all deposits of $ 20 - 200

Coupon code : 2050WEEK
Redeemable UNLIMITED times until July 14, 2008!

Go to

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

and login.

Deposit methods available :


1> American Express or JCB credit card - Global players including US!
2> EWalletXpress E-Wallet for checks or 900 telephone charges - US & Canada players only
3> Western Union or Moneygram - Global players including US!
4> Neteller E-Wallet - Non-US & Canada players only
5> Click2Pay E-Wallet- Non-US players only
6> Moneybookers E-Wallet - Non-US players only

Coupon code 2050SLOTS is available to you and any friends you may refer by using the "Forward to a Friend" link at the bottom of this email.
You will receive 333% bonus on your friend's deposit!

Full details of refer a friend bonus and even more bonuses at :

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

Don't forget to read our terms and conditions before redeeming any bonus including 2050SLOTS :

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

Enjoy!


^^^^^^^^YEAH RIGHT^^^^^...lol

 

[vinylweatherman]

It is impossible to win with any bonus above 1000%. The max cashout is 1x bonus, so if you deposit $100, and get 2050%, your max cashout is the amount of the bonus after meeting 30x WR, which is LESS than your original balance of bonus+deposit. Since the bonus is "sticky", withdrawing 1x bonus will result in winnings of $0



Now this (for a laugh)

The reasoning behind this rule is simple. Whatever deposit bonus we offer is redeemable unlimited times. So if you are a player that enjoys bonuses there is no reason not to redeem at least one of our bonuses on every deposit (no reason except bonus abuse of course, which we deplore)

This is their explanation for a permanent max cashout being applied, even if you don't take a bonus

Highlighted is where they explain that NOT taking a bonus is somehow "bonus abuse"

What next, will they claim that losing your 2050% bonus means that you are 100% CERTAIN to win on their RANDOM GAMES on your next deposit to even out the payouts, and that the max cashout rule prevents this

This would only be the case if they were using software "switches" to manipulate the games, such that players who NEVER take bonuses get a higher payout than those that do.


Funnlily enough, I have seen these terms somewhere before, almost word for word....

Prism/Virtual group

 

[Casinomeister]

Admin Note - new I-gaming member

Pamper Casino joined the forum this weekend:
https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/members/

I'm sure he'll be able to answer your questions.

 

[Alexishot69]

fao pampers

Sounds quite silly to be honest writing what in the uk woul dread for attention of nappies <diapers> Anyhow mr pamper rep maybe u can explain the ridiculous bonus issues written clearly above ? where it seems winning is impossible and bonus abuse is not taking one...lol..but i guess thats why it seems your sites pampers are full huh

 

[pampercasino]

Alexishot69,

Please remember that you checked the box on our signup page agreeing to

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

This agreement states in relevant part :

1.2.1.8. Allow us to email you promotions from time to time to the email address you use to register. You will be given the option to unsubscribe within each email;

Promotional emails never go out more than twice a week and it is usually restricted to once a week.

If you do not wish to receive future emails from us simply click the "manage your subscription" button within the promotional email you got and unsubscribe from the list. You will be added to our Global Suppression list and will never hear from us again unless their is activity in your casino account in which case you will receive account related emails only. We are obligated to send those due to contractual agreements with our credit card processors and other processing providers and you cannot unsubscribe from those.

Regarding the other messages in this thread, I have a suggestion on how to play without any wagering requirements and without any maximum cashout! Don't take any bonuses

 

[chuchu59]

A suggestion for pamper casino. I have seen a couple of the promos and they did look like spam. Although the parties involved may have consented to recieving the promotions, cant you give some thought to them so that they are presented in a meaningful way. In their present form, the promos do reflect badly on the casino. Just my 2c.

 

[KasinoKing]

Regarding the other messages in this thread, I have a suggestion on how to play without any wagering requirements and without any maximum cashout! Don't take any bonuses

And have you no comment on your 'Impossible to Win from' bonus???

It is impossible to win with any bonus above 1000%. The max cashout is 1x bonus, so if you deposit $100, and get 2050%, your max cashout is the amount of the bonus after meeting 30x WR, which is LESS than your original balance of bonus+deposit. Since the bonus is "sticky", withdrawing 1x bonus will result in winnings of $0

If you weren't tricking honest people out of hard-earned money, that would be hilarious!

 

[pampercasino]

And have you no comment on your 'Impossible to Win from' bonus???

It is impossible to win with any bonus above 1000%. The max cashout is 1x bonus, so if you deposit $100, and get 2050%, your max cashout is the amount of the bonus after meeting 30x WR, which is LESS than your original balance of bonus+deposit. Since the bonus is "sticky", withdrawing 1x bonus will result in winnings of $0

If you weren't tricking honest people out of hard-earned money, that would be hilarious!

I'm sorry I didn't read that part carefully enough. That is a misinterpretation of the rule.

In his example, if you deposit $ 100 and get 2050% bonus (which means bonus would be $ 2050) your maximum cashout is 1X the bonus or $ 2050. So if you have $ 5000 in your account after meeting the 30X wagering requirements you can cashout $ 2050 and the rest will be zeroed out.

Hope that sorts out the confusion.

 

[pampercasino]

A suggestion for pamper casino. I have seen a couple of the promos and they did look like spam. Although the parties involved may have consented to recieving the promotions, cant you give some thought to them so that they are presented in a meaningful way. In their present form, the promos do reflect badly on the casino. Just my 2c.

Thanks for the suggestion Chuchu. I will pass it along to the advertising folks.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I'm sorry I didn't read that part carefully enough. That is a misinterpretation of the rule.

In his example, if you deposit $ 100 and get 2050% bonus (which means bonus would be $ 2050) your maximum cashout is 1X the bonus or $ 2050. So if you have $ 5000 in your account after meeting the 30X wagering requirements you can cashout $ 2050 and the rest will be zeroed out.

Hope that sorts out the confusion.

OK, fair enough, so a 1x max cashout is what other casinos would call a 2x max cashout, because they include the sticky bonus as part of the limit, and it seems pamper casino does not.

Now, for the $64,000 question neatly sidestepped.

Scenario.

Player takes huge bonus and loses the lot and goes away.

Some time later, he decides to play WITHOUT a bonus, so deposits into his account that starts at ZERO.

Now, at Pamper casino, because of the previous bonus, he is restricted still to the max cashout from that first bonus. Pamper give the reasoning behind this as protecting the casino against "bonus abuse".

This is complete and utter bollox!!!!

In any REPUTABLE casino, each spin or deal is completely independent of what went before, this is what is known as "the games are random". This means that however the player played his large bonus down to zero, this earlier play will have absolutely NO effect whatsoever on the current session where no bonus is taken. Well, unless of course, you have "cheating software", such that it artificially controls the games to meet a specific per player long term payout, but ignores whether the play is with bonus money or real money. Under this "cheating software" scenario, it would indeed be "bonus abuse" to take a 2050% bonus, deliberately turn down winning opportunities (known among us Fruit Machine players as "forcing") until reaching a zero balance - come back later, and instead of turning down the wins, collect them. With the 2050% bonus lost, the software will "percentage stabilise" the payouts now that the player is accepting them, and they will clean up by winning around a third of the deliberately dumped bonus back on a straight cash deposit, hence your carry over of max cashout, but not WR.

In a casino powered by the brand leader Microgaming, I can be given a 2000 free chip (unlikely) and DELIBERATELY lose the lot on Video Poker by refusing all winning hands, perhaps by deliberately holding losing deals etc.
If I then come back later and deposit 200, and play the SAME VP game, it will play just as randomly as before, I most certainly would NOT be able to "abuse" the earlier free chip through the game throwing wins at me until the server had rebalanced my payback to the game's norm.

It is this kind of rule, that when seen in T & C, cries "ROGUE CASINO" at any experienced player who has the slightest idea about how RANDOM games work. Whoever thought this rule was necessary to guard against "bonus abuse" is an idiot*, and should not be in charge of an online casino. (perhaps they have been playing too many Fruit Machines before opening this casino).

* Most of us here will probably think something a little different, that far from being an "idiot", this person knows that the software CAN INDEED be manipulated just like a "Fruit Machine", and knows that there are many here in the UK that would know how to do it, or would work it out pretty quickly, and would proceed to bankrupt the casino through those 2050% bonus.

For those in the UK, remember the old "Pie Factory" Fruit Machine. Here is an analogy. The arcade offers me 50 worth of free play if I purchase 50 worth of coins. I request the entire 50 be dumped in "Pie Factory", and proceed to refuse all wins. I then play with my own money, and soon force out the "red" exchange, take 1, gamble next cash win to 25, exchange next for "red" board and take another 25 to 40. I then leave the premises with a smirk on my face. This is successful "bonus abuse", but it only works because that particular machine is about as far from random as you can get. The cycle was so predictable that this could be done on demand, and would be 100% reliable to hit the expected payout target once you had forced out the streak. With the 100% "bonus" on the 50, it is +EV every time if the target of the machine is over 50%, and it was usually around the 78% mark.

It was fun to go up and down the motorways taking these beggars out, but it was a pity the method became so well known that in the end it was hard to find someone who DIDN'T know how to do it.

 

[lots0]

... It is this kind of rule, that when seen in T & C, cries "ROGUE CASINO" at any experienced player who has the slightest idea about how RANDOM games work. Whoever thought this rule was necessary to guard against "bonus abuse" is an idiot*, and should not be in charge of an online casino.

I could not agree with VWM more.

 

[pampercasino]

Vinyl,

I had a long chat today with the people who make these rules and discussed the reasoning behind it. While I'm certainly not going to get in a long back and forth about the whys of our terms and conditions I am authorized to clarify, just this once, why this policy exists.

Pamper gives out some of the biggest bonuses given out by any casino in the industry today. Now it is no secret slot machines payout a certain % of monies. All slot machines from Vegas to Monaco to ours are set to pay anything from 95% - 99.9%. Obviously, since the software is fair it does not distinguish between bonus and real money play. So while a player depositing $ 100 at some other casino giving out 50% bonus would play $ 150 on the slot machines, at Pamper he would play $ 2150 with the 2050% bonus. So the payout on the machine would become based on $ 2150 in losses if he were to lose it all.

So the max cashout policy is a liability limiting exercise. The more max cashouts we have out there the less our potential liability on the machines with the huge bonuses that have not taken in as much money as "think" they have.

Regarding any other claim of our software not being random or any other conspiracy theories please consult :

Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)

I hope that clears it up....

 

[vinylweatherman]

Vinyl,

I had a long chat today with the people who make these rules and discussed the reasoning behind it. While I'm certainly not going to get in a long back and forth about the whys of our terms and conditions I am authorized to clarify, just this once, why this policy exists.

Pamper gives out some of the biggest bonuses given out by any casino in the industry today. Now it is no secret slot machines payout a certain % of monies. All slot machines from Vegas to Monaco to ours are set to pay anything from 95% - 99.9%. Obviously, since the software is fair it does not distinguish between bonus and real money play. So while a player depositing $ 100 at some other casino giving out 50% bonus would play $ 150 on the slot machines, at Pamper he would play $ 2150 with the 2050% bonus. So the payout on the machine would become based on $ 2150 in losses if he were to lose it all.

So the max cashout policy is a liability limiting exercise. The more max cashouts we have out there the less our potential liability on the machines with the huge bonuses that have not taken in as much money as "think" they have.
Regarding any other claim of our software not being random or any other conspiracy theories please consult :

Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)

I hope that clears it up....

GOTCHA:yahoo:

You have just admitted that your "random" slot games have a "memory", and will act based on the play that has gone before. This is NOT A RANDOM SLOT, it is a "Fruit Machine"

If you had proper random slots, it would not matter one bit that a player had thrown a 2050% bonus into it yesterday, he would be no more likely to win today with an unbonused deposit than if he had won a fortune the day before.

What you have, in essence, is "cheating software", where your slots will only pay back a set portion of what they take in, and will ONLY pay back from a "bank" of money previously taken, and not purely by a random result from the RNG on each spin.

If your slots were true random slots, the explanation would just be a load of hot air, and either shows deliberate cheating, or management who have absolutely no idea how "random" works, and who would go to Vegas, see some idiot throw $20,000 into a poor paying slot, and then mortgage his house to chase the $16,000 or so that is certainly "due back" because of the set percentage payout of the game.

 

[aka23]

* Most of us here will probably think something a little different, that far from being an "idiot", this person knows that the software CAN INDEED be manipulated just like a "Fruit Machine", and knows that there are many here in the UK that would know how to do it, or would work it out pretty quickly, and would proceed to bankrupt the casino through those 2050% bonus.

Yes, I think you are onto something. Pamper uses AST software. AST/ThrillX software is known for odd player results, and many believe the software is not purely random. For example, two players reported a combined result that was ~12 standard deviations below the expected return at Pamper. The chance of this event occurring randomly is approximately 0.000000000000000000000000000000004.

A player at another casino using the software, mentioned a similar unlikely result to a manager who refunded his $1500 loss and said the software was accidentally hooked up to a "test" server when he played. Could the players with the 12SD result at Pamper have been on a "test server" as well? Or could the odd results relate to being able to offer the 2050% bonus listed in this thread?

 

[pampercasino]

Actually, I think you are misconstruing my comments again either deliberately or likely because you don't understand how progressive slot machines/jackpots work.

Regardless, management is even considering removing this policy anyway since I am told it is not as useful as some believe. I concede you are right about the fact that the standard slot machines with no progressive jackpot do not work that way. They have no memory of how much they have taken in and so this policy doesn't help in those machines. I am not saying progressive jackpots "have a memory" but the more you play the more the jackpot goes up as a whole. Our machines have several mini jackpots etc. and it helps to limit liability on those on players who have taken a bonus.

I will leave it at that.

Like I said, this account is setup to deal with actual player issues. Not hypotheticals or discussions on our company policies.

 

[GaryWatson]

 

[vinylweatherman]

Actually, I think you are misconstruing my comments again either deliberately or likely because you don't understand how progressive slot machines/jackpots work.

Regardless, management is even considering removing this policy anyway since I am told it is not as useful as some believe. I concede you are right about the fact that the standard slot machines with no progressive jackpot do not work that way. They have no memory of how much they have taken in and so this policy doesn't help in those machines. I am not saying progressive jackpots "have a memory" but the more you play the more the jackpot goes up as a whole. Our machines have several mini jackpots etc. and it helps to limit liability on those on players who have taken a bonus.

I will leave it at that.

Like I said, this account is setup to deal with actual player issues. Not hypotheticals or discussions on our company policies.

'Fraid yer horse has bolted - no good shutting the stable door now.

The argument does not even work for progressives either, as the term ONLY applies to individual players who have taken a bonus, surely if a player NEVER took a bonus, they would be free to take advantage of your progressives that have been fed by OTHER players who use bonuses.

This term would not help at all in limiting liabilty, unless bonuses became COMPULSORY for ALL.

The fact that any player does not take a bonus should have no influence on their ability to hit a progressive, they may be fed by bonus funds, but there is no way a "bonus abuser" can manipulate even a "random progressive" by knowing when, and how much, to deposit without a bonus in order to "abuse" the bonuses they took previously.

The reported highly unlikely results added to this thread for this software also cast doubt on the statement that these games are all random.

If your management fear that progressives could be manipulated, they must know that there is a way for a player to learn to predict when they fall, perhaps by knowning they are set to fall after a given number of spins, or before they hit a certain maximum value.

The other suggestion is that all the progressives are simply for show, and that with most players taking the bonuses, the bulk of any progressive win is ALWAYS going to be forefeit under the max cashout rules of the bonus on the winner's account at the time.

The rule has another failing. If indeed one could manipulate the games, I could claim large bonuses, such as 2050%, and my later deposits without bonuses would be subject to the max cashout of the previous bonus.

The rep's own example states

In his example, if you deposit $ 100 and get 2050% bonus (which means bonus would be $ 2050) your maximum cashout is 1X the bonus or $ 2050. So if you have $ 5000 in your account after meeting the 30X wagering requirements you can cashout $ 2050 and the rest will be zeroed out.

So, I could deposit $100 and deliberately "force" a progressive. My next deposit could be $100 WITHOUT a bonus, and this time I try my best to win. I play the same progressive that I lost my entire $2050 bonus $100 deposit in before, which built up all the progressive pots. Management use the carry over of max cashout to protect them from, as stated, "bonus abuse" because bonuses have fed the progressive pots far more than "real" money.
This presumes that I have been clever enough to have predicted that now is the time to complete this act of "bonus abuse" by getting the progressive to pay on my unbonused $100, with the "abuse" being that I have sidestepped the max cashout rules and get to keep the entire progressive.
Management therefore "deplore" this style of play (they said it, in that term), and that to protect them against this, the previous max cashout of 1x bonus still applies, which limits me to $2050, even though I didn't take a bonus.

So, this protects them - err, well, not really, for even despite this rule, my total deposits have been $200, and I have cashed out $2050 as alowed. I am STILL $1850 up, even though most of the progressive win has been forefeit.

Now, I would just repeat the exercise, take 2050% bonus, and then deposit $100 with no bonus. I will STILL clean out the casino, just much more slowly, and because this is not against the terms designed to limit liability, they will have to invoke other rules such as the infamous "F U Clause" to void my cashouts.

If the progressives are truly random though, this method of "abuse" will not work, as 99.99% of the time my unbonused $100 will NOT yield me the progressive, and I would then be $200 down, and then $400 down the next time I tried it. Further, the progressive would be 2050% MORE likely to hit at random while playing with the bonused deposit (balance $2150) than when playing with my unbonused $100. The strategy would fail, and any competent casino owner would have never even worried about this nonsense in the first place. Since management DID think this term necessary, it has to indicate that their knowledge of how the software works made them realise such protection was needed against this specific playing style (deposit with bonus alternating with deposits without), because it would confer an unacceptable advantage on the "bonus abuser" carrying it out.

 

[pampercasino]

There isn't much new in your post to address except the same old "fruit machine" stuff. By the way, "Fruit machines" mean something entirely different where I come from (for those not familiar have a look at this

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

and laugh at the stupidity of years past)

Regarding the rest of what you said, I just want to point out if the casino has the option to cap it's liability on any player account to $ X amount per deposit versus having an uncapped liability strictly speaking from a liability limiting point of view the former option is better. That is all it is at this point.

I will close this matter from our side with a simple line the guy I discussed it with used "If that max cashout amount was good enough with the bonus it should be good enough without it."

 

[vinylweatherman]

There isn't much new in your post to address except the same old "fruit machine" stuff. By the way, "Fruit machines" mean something entirely different where I come from (for those not familiar have a look at this

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

and laugh at the stupidity of years past)

Regarding the rest of what you said, I just want to point out if the casino has the option to cap it's liability on any player account to $ X amount per deposit versus having an uncapped liability strictly speaking from a liability limiting point of view the former option is better. That is all it is at this point.

I will close this matter from our side with a simple line the guy I discussed it with used "If that max cashout amount was good enough with the bonus it should be good enough without it."

It may be better for business, but for players it's a signal to run away!!!!!

Who would want to play at a casino that is so worried about cashflow that it has to limit it's liability on what would simply be a run of exceptional luck on the part of a player. A well run casino would have sufficient backing to be able to take any hit that lady luck throws their way, and would ensure that their games were set such that stakes were limited to control the amount that could theoretically be won with the luckiest possible combination, such as a pat dealt Royal Flush in high stakes multi-hand video poker, a long run at high stakes Blackjack, or the max payouts on the slots.
What is NOT good practice is to offer games with the possibility of huge payouts that tempt players in, but with the casino having to use capped liability as a protection, meaning these high payouts are never actually made.

I see you are in Costa Rica - so what's with the LONDON address (even if it is NOT the Pizzaria). IF you are actually based in Costa Rica, THIS is the address you should be showing on your website. You are not "licenced in Costa Rica" by the way, they don't actually OFFER "gaming" licences at all, which makes you technically an unlicenced online casino.

 

[LaHutti]

Not that I ever think anyone from this forum, would ever fall for a 2050% bonus in the first place...that alone would be enough to make me and a lot of other players run screaming.

@VinylWeatherman

Once again you cut to the bone, and made a lot of excellent points, including, but not limited to, your observation of the rep's location (I must admit, I hadn't even noticed that).
So if the 2050% bogus wasn't enough to keep people away from that place, I hope your posts are, and you once again proved to be a valuable member of this forum

 

[USA2112]

The maximum withdrawable amount on any bonus of 1001% & above is 1X the amount of the bonus.

Example : If you deposit $ 100 & receive a 2000% bonus the bonus you will receive will be 2000% of $ 100 = $ 2000. Since the maximum cashout amount is 1X the amount of the bonus the maximum withdrawable amount will be $ 2000 x 1 = $ 2000. In this case, any additional funds in your account over and above the maximum cashout of $ 2000 will be removed (zeroed out) at the time of your withdrawal.

The maximum cashout limitation is permanently enforced on your account once you take any deposit bonus. All future withdrawals become limited to the most recent maximum cashout you had with the last bonus you took. The fact that you don't take a bonus on your latest deposit is not considered relevant. Once you take a bonus whatever the last available maximum cashout on your account was is considered the maximum withdrawable amount.

Example : If you deposit $ 100 & receive a 200% bonus the bonus you will receive will be 200% of $ 100 = $ 200. Since the maximum cashout is 5X the amount of the bonus the maximum withdrawable amount will be $ 200 x 5 = $ 1000. Let's say you either win and withdraw the maximum cashout or lose everything and then decide to deposit $ 100 again but choose not to take a bonus this time (a bonus is always available to take on pampercasino.com) In this case your maximum cashout will still be $ 1000. Even if you win $ 1500 the maximum withdrawable amount will remain $ 1000 even though you didn't take a bonus on the last deposit. This maximum cashout won't change until you take another bonus which has a different maximum cashout.

The reasoning behind this rule is simple. Whatever deposit bonus we offer is redeemable unlimited times. So if you are a player that enjoys bonuses there is no reason not to redeem at least one of our bonuses on every deposit (no reason except bonus abuse of course, which we deplore)

This is interesting. Claim a bonus and your limited to a max cash out rule, "Sounds reasonable"

However, deposit a second time with your own money without claiming a bonus and your still bound by the same max cash out terms of the previous bonus. Am I missing something here! permanently enforced on your account

So once you claim a bonus your always bound by the max cash out rule of the previous bonus with the casino? Seems this prevents the possibility of ever cashing out a progessive pot if you've claimed a bonus at any point in time.

Or withdrawal any winnings above the max cash out rule on the previous bonus even though your depositing with your own money without claiming bonuses.

Plus, this would mean once you claim your first bonus with the casino your always bound by max cash out rules...

No winnings are paid out to accounts with APO/FPO or any kind of P.O.box addresses. Any players who enters such an address in his account will not be paid any winnings and will have his/her deposit returned.

What's up with this, I have an address but also have a P.O. Box due to the rural location I live in, have too.

What does this have to do with confiscating players winnings. And how are you going to return there funds? to their P.O. Box..

Account terminations

We reserve the right to terminate the account of any player at any time at our sole discretion.

If an account is being terminated due to violation of any rule on this page or anywhere else on this site then all funds in that account shall be null and void. Any available deposit may be returned if you are found to have not acted in an effort to defraud the casino. In case of a term #8 violation (multiple accounts) the manager may void only the player's winnings and allow him to continue wagering if the violation was unintentional provided the player agrees to be more careful in the future.

Now here's a set up. If you open two accounts you will be given a second chance if your more careful in the future.. But they will confinscate your winnings.

If the casino manager found it was unintentional then it would be an honest mistake, there would be no reason to confinscate the players winnings, unless there was an alternative objective for the term. This must just be a slap on the hand when they confinscate your winnings.

Then the mulitple account holders are allowed a second chance, for what! Simple, a second chance to deposit more and lose and then confinscate their money again when they win.

I thought casinos close multiple accounts and they stayed closed. Here you get do overs.

Players who intentionally open multiple accounts are doing it for one reason, the free money and to pull one over on the casino, their called bonus abusers for a reason. Their not the ones that will fall for this do over clause.

Looks like some work needs to be done on these terms...:notworthy

 

[funky_seagull]

Alexishot69,

Please remember that you checked the box on our signup page agreeing to

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

This agreement states in relevant part :

1.2.1.8. Allow us to email you promotions from time to time to the email address you use to register. You will be given the option to unsubscribe within each email;

I have never checked any box or signed up with your site but I recieved several promotional emails from you.

That was the first thing that put me off joining.

The 2nd thing was the name. Made me think of nappies. And is really tacky and not very well thought out.

The 3rd thing was the max cashout policy. Which looks suspicously like you don't have enough money to deal with a big win.

I am sorry but it all sounds dodgy to me.

I hope I am wrong. For the sake of anyone who joins your casino...

 

[SlotMonster]

I have never checked any box or signed up with your site but I recieved several promotional emails from you.

It could be checked by default, so you just didn't see that it had already been checked and left it "as is"...maybe

 

[funky_seagull]

I had never heard of pamper until I recieved their promotional email.

Unless they got my email from clubplayer... Because I did join club player ages ago when I didn't know any better... And recieved promotional emails from cirrus and coolcat as a result. who I learnt later were all part of the same group...

 

[poser]

Isn't it possible, that this max cashout rule for further deposits (even w/o bonus) is in playce because of the (strange) possiblility to "zero out" each and every bonus at every time you like with a second deposit.
Remember, if you do zero out with a new deposit, even your wagering requirements are done !!!

So, easy:

- dep: 20$, get 2000% = 420$

- make a BIG gamble to double up to 840 (all games are allowed, just do not count !!!!!)

- then "zero out" bonus + wagering req. with a new deposit of 20 w/o bonus (or with a bonus with smaller WR,eg 100%) -> 840 - 400 (sticky) = 440$.


- => +EV (440 * 0,47 ~ 210$)

So, with that max cashout rule, it all becomes a little harder, but still too easy.

And even w/o such "tricks" (that are mentioned in the T+Cs as allowed!!), a 500% Video Poker Bonus on EVERY deposit for example, sticky or not, 30% WR or not, max cashout or not, is too easy to exploit with huge bettings alone (just use a sticky-bonus calculator...). Can't be ok. Reminds me of the "Queen of Rogue City".

(Their "Aces and Faces" payout 99,2%, ALLOWED for 500% !!! ??????????)