QuatroCasino (aka CasinoRewards ) VS momchildobrev

[The Dude]

You pretty much showed me that you are scared of me.

This is what I hate. Fraudsters who come back and try to accuse me that "it's all about the money" "you protect casinos, blah blah blah."

Take a look into the mirror, momchildobrev - you're the one who is motivated by greed.

I'm not going to explain to you what they've explained to me. You want to know how you got caught, I'm not going to provide you with this.

Like I said - good luck with eCOGRA. If they clear you, you can have your account back

And please, post your fraudulent claim all over the internet - I couldn't care less.

Bye -

 

[Seventh777]

Ok,

Oh yes... and this is the PM from Renee:
Expired Image
Somebody is lying, but who?I ll let you decide by yourself.
Thanks

`Moneybooker`s has confirmed with our fraud team that you changed the name on your Moneybooker`s account`, but he didn`t, he posted a screenshot of a different account.

Fraudster - most definitely, got his just desserts, but, two wrongs do not make a right in my book, it was clearly stated that he changed the name on his account, this was verified by Moneybooker`s (allegedly), but from where i`m standing, it was not, if Moneybooker`s had verified that he had access to another account, then that would be that.

So, was he using these multi accounts for bonus abuse?, if for arguments sake he did change the name on his Moneybooker`s account, which by all accounts can be done in certain circumstances, what casino related crime would he have actually committed?.

P.S.
Is that a photo of Renee?, if so, you have a gorgeous smile .

 

[Nifty29]

`Moneybooker`s has confirmed with our fraud team that you changed the name on your Moneybooker`s account`, but he didn`t, he posted a screenshot of a different account.

Fraudster - most definitely, got his just desserts, but, two wrongs do not make a right in my book, it was clearly stated that he changed the name on his account, this was verified by Moneybooker`s (allegedly), but from where i`m standing, it was not, if Moneybooker`s had verified that he had access to another account, then that would be that.

So, was he using these multi accounts for bonus abuse?, if for arguments sake he did change the name on his Moneybooker`s account, which by all accounts can be done in certain circumstances, what casino related crime would he have actually committed?.

P.S.
Is that a photo of Renee?, if so, you have a gorgeous smile .

Don't drag the rep through the mud here. It is 100% the OPs fraudulent behaviour that caused this situation.

It may be that she may have phrased something incorrectly, but if you read Bryans earlier post it was only until after she said this that it was discovered they were actually looking at two different accounts.

I don't see the second "wrong".

 

[Seventh777]

Don't drag the rep through the mud here. It is 100% the OPs fraudulent behaviour that caused this situation.

It may be that she may have phrased something incorrectly, but if you read Bryans earlier post it was only until after she said this that it was discovered they were actually looking at two different accounts.

I don't see the second "wrong".

Phrasing something incorrectly, she clearly stated that Moneybooker`s had reliably informed the fraud team that the name on the account was changed, this was not the case, i`m not disputing the fact that the OP was in the wrong.

I fail to see how blatantly stating that Moneybooker`s verified a name change, is phrasing something incorrectly.

 

[The Dude]

Yes, that's a photo of Renee - she's a real person

As far as I can tell, there was a misunderstanding between Renee and the Fraud team, perhaps she can clarify this, but I'll try to explain it since she's on Australia time and it might be awhile before she can get back to this.

Renee knew that the fraud team was in contact with MB, and she knew they were also looking at the screen shot in the thread. They said "he changed his name" but this was referring to the screenshot - this was not the MB account that the player had originally tried to make a withdrawal to. (the fraud team's English isn't that good from what I gather)

So she interpreted this as Moneybookers confirming a name change - which in fact they didn't.

But regardless of this slip up, this guy was still trying to commit fraud.
What has happened is that this guy tried to withdraw to someone else's MB account, then posted screenshots of one of his moneybookers accounts trying to make the casino look like they are trying to rip him off.

 

[Silencio]

People like this #!$@&^* excuse my french, are spoiling it for the rest. And by rest I mostly mean their fellow country citizens. I'm not bulgarian, however I do know that some casino's don't allow people from Bulgaria to claim bonuses and or even to play at all.
I know it can be hard making a living there, but still, how much time did he spend on this, and what did he get out of it..
Anyhow glad he's gone, the topic kept showing up the latest tree, and I just had to read it even though it irritated me I'm amazed of the patience you guys show..

 

[Seventh777]

Yes, that's a photo of Renee - she's a real person

As far as I can tell, there was a misunderstanding between Renee and the Fraud team, perhaps she can clarify this, but I'll try to explain it since she's on Australia time and it might be awhile before she can get back to this.

Renee knew that the fraud team was in contact with MB, and she knew they were also looking at the screen shot in the thread. They said "he changed his name" but this was referring to the screenshot - this was not the MB account that the player had originally tried to make a withdrawal to. (the fraud team's English isn't that good from what I gather)

So she interpreted this as Moneybookers confirming a name change - which in fact they didn't.

But regardless of this slip up, this guy was still trying to commit fraud.
What has happened is that this guy tried to withdraw to someone else's MB account, then posted screenshots of one of his moneybookers accounts trying to make the casino look like they are trying to rip him off.

Ah I see, so he actually took a gamble with his cash on the hope he would get a double payout, also, isn`t it the case at MGS that to make a withdrawal you must have at least deposited once using the same method?.

My apologies to Renee, I wasn`t trying to demean her (how could you with that smile ).

 

[refre]

Ah I see, so he actually took a gamble with his cash on the hope he would get a double payout, also, isn`t it the case at MGS that to make a withdrawal you must have at least deposited once using the same method?.

My apologies to Renee, I wasn`t trying to demean her (how could you with that smile ).

It's strange isn't it.
Clearly something fishy going on when you have screenshots of another player's MB account.

I'm guessing he would have been paid had he just sent the correct screenie.
But "he" may not be him at all lol, god knows how many MB accounts he has.
And what he uses them for.


Freddy

 

[Seventh777]

It's strange isn't it.
Clearly something fishy going on when you have screenshots of another player's MB account.

I'm guessing he would have been paid had he just sent the correct screenie.
But "he" may not be him at all lol, god knows how many MB accounts he has.
And what he uses them for.


Freddy

Aye it`s very strange, also Moneybooker`s accounts are linked to an email address, so what the hell he was thinking of is beyond me, why the hell would anyone try and withdraw to an account of any kind not in their name .

 

[Bencuri]

Well, Renée said that MB has confirmed the name change, and that she has tried changing her name on her MB account, which she succesfully did in 1 day. At least the first part of this claim is already proved lie. So Renée lied. Nobody gave her a confirmation of the players name change, she posted her interpretation, but please, and interpretation should not be presented as confirmation. So, she clearly lied. Why don't you ban her then? She is a liar rep, because she is just posting about interpretations presented as confirmations. That is not fair.

Secondly, how is it possible to withdraw to a secondary MB account? And why would that guy do that? If he would have liked to do money laundering, do you think he would have done it this way?:

1. He wants to launder 500$
2. He chooses a promo: deposit 1$, get 20$
3. He is extremely lucky, because extreme luck is needed to get that 20$ to 500$ and complete the WR.
4. He withdraws that money to the secondary account.

Well, not the best way for laundering, depositing 600$, getting it down to 500$ and withdarwing that would be a more easier way, don't you think.

Moreover I am not sure the cashier accepts withdrawals to a secondary account at all. I don't want to test it, because the min. withdrawal at Casino Rewards is 50$, and I don't want it get stucked to the system. I won't make them richer with a cent either. But anyway, usually you cannot withdraw from anywhere without depositing money from a payment method, and the withdrawal will be sent back to that registered method. I doubt the cashier would allow the transaction to a secondary account, other than the one you used for deposit. If someone could try it, we could know it for sure of course, but I won't risk my 50$. But anyhow it just sounds too odd that the cashier would allow an unregistered e-mail with moneybookers to withdraw to. Considering the security measures at Microgaming it sounds odd.

Meister, why don't you let this guy prove that he don't have 2 accounts? It is clear Renée lied when he presented us an interpretation as a confirmation, thus her credibility became questionable. This situation is quite confusing, because there are a lots of odd aspects involved:

1. Renée changes her name at MB in one day.
2. There is her mispresentation of a suspicion.
3. The cashier accepts transaction to an unregistered MB e-mail.

With all the info presented this far, this case has not become clear. Please be faithful to the aims of your forum, and allow us to see more clear. Let that guy give us proof.

 

[Bencuri]

I have just checked my Casino Action account at Casino Rewards, in case I want to add a different e-mail address to withdraw to than the one I used for depositing (registered at Moneybookers), the system doesn't change it. So how was he able to initiate a withdrawal to an e-mail he hasn't registered before?

 

[The Dude]

Hi Bencuri,

Don't get all hung up about the name change thing.

Please reread my post where I said:

As far as I can tell, there was a misunderstanding between Renee and the Fraud team, perhaps she can clarify this, but I'll try to explain it since she's on Australia time and it might be awhile before she can get back to this.

Renee knew that the fraud team was in contact with MB, and she knew they were also looking at the screen shot in the thread. They said "he changed his name" but this was referring to the screenshot - this was not the MB account that the player had originally tried to make a withdrawal to. (the fraud team's English isn't that good from what I gather)

So she interpreted this as Moneybookers confirming a name change - which in fact they didn't.

There is a big difference of being mistaken and lying about something. And with this case, it doesn't change the fact that this guy had committed fraud.

 

[Bencuri]

Hi Bencuri,

Don't get all hung up about the name change thing.

Please reread my post where I said:


There is a big difference of being mistaken and lying about something. And with this case, it doesn't change the fact that this guy had committed fraud.

Sorry Meister, but it is still not correct. Because what did Renée said?:

'As I said to him, moneybookers has confirmed with our fraud team that you changed the name '

Did MB confirm this? No. So she reported something that is not ture, so what shall I call that then if not lie.

The problem with that you want to say is that it would only stand if Renée would have said: 'The fraud team confirmed you changed your name.'

These are two different things.

And why did Renée say she managed to change her name? The team reported a name change, okay she misunderstood it, okay we say on our side to this, but huh, what a surprise, ther is this other lie happening. Or she misunderstood what she personally did? Even if there was a misunderstanding on the info from the fraud team, I doubt she would misunderstood what she personally tried to do. Or she did something with her MB account, and she missunderstood it as 'name changed'? I doubt she would misunderstood what she did. And if she gets a confirmation from the fruad team, she doesn't need to change anything on her account. So what is that test of changing for? This also proved she was not telling the truth and it is quite messy what she's replying. Even if the OP is fraudster, she behaved in a questionable manner.

And how did the player managed to initiate a withdrawal when the Cashier doesn't let withdrawals to an e-mail that was not used for depositing? I have just tried this option, but it doesn't work. If you log in to the cashier, it offers changing the moneybookers e-mail to withdraw to, but it doesn't allow it for previously unused e-mails (I mean that you didn't use for depositing).

I don't think it is fair that you try to make it seem as if the case was closed under such circumstances. Think of the following, what if it would have happened like this:

1. The player starts the thread.
2. Renée replies, saying you changed your name, our fraud team confirmed it.
3. It turns out the player wanted to withdraw to a different account.

It is quite different then what happened:

1. The player starts the thread.
2. Renée replies MB confirmed the name change. She says she changed her name on MB.
3. The player tried to withdraw to another account, however the cahsier seems not to allow to initiate withdrawals this way.

In the first case I would accept your wish to close the case, but even if the player is really a fraudster in reality, with such messy replies from the Reps, we should make this case more clear. So why don'T you allow him just to prove he didn't initiate withdrawal to another account. If he fails then, okay, we can surely say he was a fraudster, but without that this case remains quite strange. Maybe alone as a case it would not, but considering the previous problems with CasinoRewards, it does.

 

[The Dude]

Sorry Bencuri, but you just don't get it. The casino has evidence of the guy committing fraud via the Moneybookers accounts. I'm not going to go into this any further.

If this bothers you, then my apologies. But I'm going to say any more on this - that's up to the casino rep to deal with. This player has exploited the forum with a bogus claim, and I refuse to let people like this pollute the forum with their garbage.

He is free to post to his heart's content elsewhere; it just ain't happening here. He is also free to submit his complaint to Tex Rees at eCOGRA. I am positively certain he will be treated fairly there.

 

[Bencuri]

But Meister, what fraud actually he commited? We don't even know that! So how could we make sure he is a fraudster when we don't even know what he commited? You say he wanted to withdraw to another account, but how if the cashier doesn't allow it? I am not saying it is not possible at all that the info you got from the casino cannot be correct, but this case is by far not clear, and closing the case at a point it stands now won't reflect a clear picture, and this way I am kind of disappointed, because I don't think it corresponds fully with the Meister's Mission.

I am sorry, but I am unable to draw a concusion that this is a fraudster OP with these added:

1. Renée says she has confirmation from MB that the player changed name. -1
2. Renée says she changed the name on her account in 1 day. It is quite a suspicious claim. And why would she do that when she already has the confirmation from the staff. -1
3. The player is accused of committing a fraud, of that we only know he wanted to withdraw to another account. That's all. But the cashier seems not to allow such transactions to be initiated anyway. -1

So as you see, what we have here is that on one side there are questionable replies from the OP, of that it clearly proved that the nr1 was unture, possibly nr2 as well. And there is nr3 that seems impossible. And of the final reason for the fraud we know simply nothing. And on the other side we have a player with a proof to defend himself against an accusation in nr1.

So the guy whom you call a fraudster presented something which can be a proof at least in a way, but on the casino side we only have untrue statements and an unclear reason for fraud, that the operation of the cashier denies so far. Under this circumstance I cannot really accept that you banned that user. Okay, he posted that bullshit after you banned him, but well, as you see the presented proofs against him are dodgy, so I am not surprised he behaved that way when you banned him because of those dodgy accusations. Anyway don't misunderstand me, I don't say that you allow yourself rely on dodgy info, I just want to say that from the posts here it didn't reveal clearly that the player is fraudster, yet he is banned, and this doesn't reflect that the forum is credible. Do you think that with these facts on the two sides that I presented, we can say 100% that the player is fraudster? I doubt...

 

[The Dude]

Like I said, I'm not going to discuss this any further. The information I have been provided constitutes fraud.

If the casino wants to explain this in further detail - they are free to do so.

I have also stated that this person can submit his complaint to eCOGRA.

That's it - and I think that's pretty fair.

 

[Bencuri]

It may only be fair to you, but not for us, readers. And also not to those who already had problems with Casino Rewards. You have the right not to say more about it and ban the user for your sake, but what is the use of this forum then? There is an OP, he is accused by a rep, it turns out the accusation is untrue, the OP also presents proof that the accusation is fake, this all corresponds with what the OP claimed. So all in all, everything the OP said so far was proved to be true, the reps word proved to be untrue, yet, you banned him. This is what simply happened. Okay, you have that new reason for calling him fraudster, but he was already accused fraudster before, he proved that he is not, so with this background I cannot really believe at this stage that he is a fraudster and with this background he would deserve at least that he may prove us that he is not a liar.

With these considered, what is the use of this forum then? The OPs present problems, and you ban them before we could see the case clearly, letting us know nothing. Even if it was the OP so far whose words turned out to be true. That is quite disappointing. How does this correspond to the Meister's Mission? From this thread the only conclusion that can be drawn is that without making the case clear the Meister decides the case is solved in favour of one side in the debate, and we don't have the right to see clearly. Is this what can be called credibility? Someone proves he was accused with untrue things, he is accused again, and for the new accusation, he is banned, however he was the only one so far who presented proof. I doubt this is what credibility is.

I don't say Miester that you cannot be right and the player may not be a fraudster, but with such acts what is the use of this forum then? Do you think this way the forum can be called credible?

 

[The Dude]

Either you have not been reading my posts, or I have not made myself clear.

Renee admitted she was mistaken when she said that Moneybookers said the name was changed on the MB account. It was the Fraud Team that said that the name (account user) was changed. Please go back and read that post. It was a simple misunderstanding and the OP ran with that trying to show that he never changed the MB account name. What he did was use more than one MB account with his casino account, and he got caught out.

The guy committed fraud at the casino - simple as that. If you want all the gory details, you're not going to get them from me - you can either wait for the casino rep to explain this, or take my word for it.

I really don't appreciate being badgered here. I suggest you back off.

 

[Bencuri]

Well I read your posts, and as I wrote I acknowledge that there was a misunderstanding between Renée and the fraud department. But this is still no reason why she had to say that she tried changing her own (Renée's) name in her Moneybookers account, and she could do it. That is quite impossible, moreover what was the use of trying it when she already had the info from the fraud team that MB confirmed the name change? Okay, she misinterpreted the info received, but she had the info, so why accusing the player then with the another thing as well, that she tried changing her name on her account, and it can be done. So with this twist, even if I'd believe that Renée misinterpreted the info from the fraud team alone, with this twist added the responses seems messy alltogether.

So in such a mess, I can also imagine this: Renée tried to threaten the player, she said they have info from MB on the name change, she said she tried to change her account name and she could, so the OP should remain silent. Then on the other hand OP presented proof, so CR came up with a new fake reason, and in the end the OP was banned. Is there proof against that it didn't happen like this? The only proof so far was presented by the OP whom you banned, while that proof was corresponding to the previous claims of the OP.

I can understand that you don't like what I am writing, but accoarding to common sense the case seems like this. And there is no lie if I write such summaries that I wrote before. So far, we, readers, met responses from the Rep, they turned out to be untrue, we met the claims of the OP, and it was proved the claim is true. So far the OP was the only one whose words turned out to be credible, who presented proof, and the Rep was the one who turned out to be saying untrue things. Yet the OP who presented the proof was banned. Excuse me, but I am unable to conclude credibility of the forum accoarding to this, if I imagine I am an outsider, I come here, and read the thread. The only conclusion I can draw is that the OP presented proof, yet he was banned. Okay, he was accused of something else later, but why didn't you wait until he makes a new move? At least what he claimed first was credible, yet you don't give him a chance. But you give a chance to the info from CR, when so far they turned out to be liars. Okay, maybe they are not, there was misunderstanding, etc., but so far there is no proof here presented on their side but only messy responses.

And by the way, Meister, can you describe us how is it possible to cheat the casino the way the player did it? It seems the cashier doesn't allow to withdraw to an e-mail you haven't used before to deposit. I deposited to Casino Action in the past, I have just tried to change the direction of the withdrawal to a different e-mail, and the cashier doesn't change to the newly added one, only the old one is allowed that I used to deposit. So how could the player initiate a withdrawal to a secondary account?

I think the OP should be given a chance to get a confirmation from MB that he doesn't use 2 accounts, that I guess is illegal at MB anyway.

 

[Nifty29]

Well I read your posts, and as I wrote I acknowledge that there was a misunderstanding between Renée and the fraud department. But this is still no reason why she had to say that she tried changing her own (Renée's) name in her Moneybookers account, and she could do it. That is quite impossible, moreover what was the use of trying it when she already had the info from the fraud team that MB confirmed the name change? Okay, she misinterpreted the info received, but she had the info, so why accusing the player then with the another thing as well, that she tried changing her name on her account, and it can be done. So with this twist, even if I'd believe that Renée misinterpreted the info from the fraud team alone, with this twist added the responses seems messy alltogether.

So in such a mess, I can also imagine this: Renée tried to threaten the player, she said they have info from MB on the name change, she said she tried to change her account name and she could, so the OP should remain silent. Then on the other hand OP presented proof, so CR came up with a new fake reason, and in the end the OP was banned. Is there proof against that it didn't happen like this? The only proof so far was presented by the OP whom you banned, while that proof was corresponding to the previous claims of the OP.

I can understand that you don't like what I am writing, but accoarding to common sense the case seems like this. And there is no lie if I write such summaries that I wrote before. So far, we, readers, met responses from the Rep, they turned out to be untrue, we met the claims of the OP, and it was proved the claim is true. So far the OP was the only one whose words turned out to be credible, who presented proof, and the Rep was the one who turned out to be saying untrue things. Yet the OP who presented the proof was banned. Excuse me, but I am unable to conclude credibility of the forum accoarding to this, if I imagine I am an outsider, I come here, and read the thread. The only conclusion I can draw is that the OP presented proof, yet he was banned. Okay, he was accused of something else later, but why didn't you wait until he makes a new move? At least what he claimed first was credible, yet you don't give him a chance. But you give a chance to the info from CR, when so far they turned out to be liars. Okay, maybe they are not, there was misunderstanding, etc., but so far there is no proof here presented on their side but only messy responses.

And by the way, Meister, can you describe us how is it possible to cheat the casino the way the player did it? It seems the cashier doesn't allow to withdraw to an e-mail you haven't used before to deposit. I deposited to Casino Action in the past, I have just tried to change the direction of the withdrawal to a different e-mail, and the cashier doesn't change to the newly added one, only the old one is allowed that I used to deposit. So how could the player initiate a withdrawal to a secondary account?

I think the OP should be given a chance to get a confirmation from MB that he doesn't use 2 accounts, that I guess is illegal at MB anyway.

You need to let it rest.

Everything has been explained, but you continue to ignore it and keep repeating the same thing.

The rep MAY have been confused initially, but that it what happens when a player tries to defraud a casino. She clarified why she said what she did.

So, the rep made a mistake - the OP committed fraud. Can you not see the difference?

Do you know this momchil person? Or is this personal against casino rewards, given your sour history with them? Whichever it is, you're heading down a path you may live to regret....and I offer that advice in good faith.

 

[Bencuri]

Well, I cannot see the difference, because for me it was not proved he is a fraudster. I don't mean he cannot be, but accoarding to what happened in the thread I haven't seen the proof for it. But I have seen the proof for the words of the OP.

Okay, now let us move away from that misinterpretation of theinfo from the fraud department. Let's see now why Renée said she changed her account name? In that case she lied again. If she didn't lie, she was not careful again to present the situation. Second time. What a rep she is!!! That already questions her credibility in my eyes. Maybe in yours not, okay it is just personal. But with the fact added that it was only the OP so far who provided proof, it counts.

And the process of adding the secondary account for withdrawal is still unclear. I tried it, I was not succesfull, because the cashier didn't let it. So by just only this fact considered, I cannot say I would believe the OP is fraudster, without further proof.

You ask why I am doing it? I am writing all this, because simply I don't believe that guy is a fraudster accoarding to the info that appeared in this thread. If I was sitting in the fraud department at CR, maybe I would. Moreover I have also experienced lying at CR myself, I have posted proof of that as well, and that was considered with the same indifference. So this way I don't believe so easily that guy is a fraudster, because I was also accused myself for different things, and that was also untrue. So this way, having met that indifference, I hardly believe that this guy committed fraud. So to say, accoarding to my experiences on how problems at CR are dealt with, I hardly believe he is a fraudster. Maybe I am wrong, after I see the proof, I will admit. But until then, I don't believe, because I have already seen my 'proof' for that.

 

[maxd]

... accoarding to what happened in the thread I haven't seen the proof for it.

As I'm sure you are aware, information in fraud cases is seldom published on the forums for the simple reason that it doesn't belong there. When the casino shares their methods and internal security information with us they do it on agreement that we keep it to ourselves, which we do. Hence it has not and almost certainly will not be published here on the forums.

In other words, given the info we've seen we're more than satisfied that this guy is a fraudster. If you come to a different conclusion (based on knowingly incomplete information) you're welcome to it, but it is no grounds to slander and defame the rep. Bryan has already stated as much up-thread, why it needs repeating is not clear.

 

[hakapuku]

As I'm sure you are aware, information in fraud cases is seldom published on the forums for the simple reason that it doesn't belong there. When the casino shares their methods and internal security information with us they do it on agreement that we keep it to ourselves, which we do. Hence it has not and almost certainly will not be published here on the forums.

In other words, given the info we've seen we're more than satisfied that this guy is a fraudster. If you come to a different conclusion (based on knowingly incomplete information) you're welcome to it, but it is no grounds to slander and defame the rep. Bryan has already stated as much up-thread, why it needs repeating is not clear.

There is something I don't understand here. You say that casino shares with you it's security methods and you can't share it with us. But what it all has to do with this specific case? Casinomeister wrote above:
"this dweeb had posted another MB account (a second one that he was trying to send funds to) thus the name had changed. "
So we all know what this guy, supposedly , did. Nothing to be secret here. Now all that is needed is to prove that Milchev actually did what he is accused of.

 

[maxd]

TCasinomeister wrote above ... So we all know what this guy, supposedly , did.

No offense but no, you don't know everything the guy was up to. Just because Bryan mentioned one aspect of the guy's activities does not mean he was telling you everything he knew, nor is he likely to.

I must say that these constant demands that we share the proof are what I'd expect from other fraudsters -- that's what they really want to know, "how did he get caught?" -- not rank-and-file forum members who, in my experience, generally respect the casino's need to keep its security issues private. Curiosity I understand, rabid fixation is a whole other thing.

 

[Bencuri]

As I'm sure you are aware, information in fraud cases is seldom published on the forums for the simple reason that it doesn't belong there. When the casino shares their methods and internal security information with us they do it on agreement that we keep it to ourselves, which we do. Hence it has not and almost certainly will not be published here on the forums.

In other words, given the info we've seen we're more than satisfied that this guy is a fraudster. If you come to a different conclusion (based on knowingly incomplete information) you're welcome to it, but it is no grounds to slander and defame the rep. Bryan has already stated as much up-thread, why it needs repeating is not clear.

Well, okay, I see you are not willing to share the info. However with the info that appeared here this case was not made clear. So anyhow you want to look at this matter, the only thing that can be drwan as an objective conclusion:

1. The OP complained.
2. The rep responded with untrue responses.
3. The OP gave proof.
4. A new reason for cheating was presented by the Meister, and the OP was banned.

For the Meister who knows the secrets of the casino, it might be enough. But what is the use of this forum then? This way it would be enough if you kept the PAB section of the site, and close this complaint section in the forum, because no matter what happens, we cannot make sure what is happening in the background. For a reader who considers things objectively,this case remains nothing, but a mess. You could make a step forward to make this case clear for us if you haven't banned him, and let him present proof. You know the secrets, so in case he would have presented fake proof, you could easily reveal that for us, so the OP wouldn't have fooled us in the end, and we could have seen more clearly. This way you could keep your secrets, yet leave the possibility for us to see clear. Seeing clearly seemed so far an aim if this forum, but now, well, what could I say, I got a different impression...

So considering the nature of this case, if you wanted to stick to objective presentation, you shouldn't have ban the OP. Simply because letting him talk more was the only way to make this case clear for us, too. Without this, you know something, that we have never heard and seen, and you want us to accept it as okay and believeable. Seeing the nature of the case it is quite an odd expectation from you.

 

[The Dude]

Hi Bencuri,

If you commit fraud and exploit this board for your own selfish agenda, you get banned. Period.

These players are given no voice here. Are you suggesting that I open this forum up to every fraudster on the planet to whine and complain about how they were cheated? Sorry - I suggest you take that suggestion elsewhere.

Life it too short to waste on this bs. I don't mind talking about general aspects of this issue, but since you have ignored the statements made by the moderators and me, thread upgraded to closed.

Final note - stop the troll posts, thank you.