external image

Schankwart Vs. Cirrus Casino

Status
Not open for further replies.
Schankwart-

You have been insisting along the way, I have told nothing but the truth in this whole thread and the facts are pretty clear. Unfortunately though I have not been able to collect the piece of proof.

Right now, you say, I have understood my part of this very well now and regret the mistakes that I made.

Are you admitting that the oral & written notification was genuine?

If not, what part of mistakes you have now understood you have made?

This issue has a long standing impact on the bonus system. And to be fair to the casino and to all who participated in this thread, please clarify.
 
Publicity can be a double-edged sword when used regularly as a tool to extort. Schankie may find his activities somewhat curtailed following this long-running and very high profile issue.
 
All I will say on this matter, until next week is..

Nothing has been completely settled!

Christine is now on vacation, and won't return until Tuesday.

So until then, this thread is off limits to lanidar and myself!!
 
Jinnia is right.

I need to wait until Cirrus-Christine is back next week before making any more public posts as I need to get in touch with her first.

You all will get the answers on your questions and concerns though, no worries!
 
Last edited:
HKGambler said:
...If not, what part of mistakes you have now understood you have made?

This issue has a long standing impact on the bonus system. And to be fair to the casino and to all who participated in this thread, please clarify.
Excellent point - and this needs to be addressed as soon as possible.
 
schankwart said:
Jinnia is right.

I need to wait until Cirrus-Christine is back next week before making any more public posts as I need to get in touch with her first.

You all will get the answers on your questions and concerns though, no worries!
Drum roll please.......................
 
...I am waiting to hear back from her myself still. I think its just noon where she is so I hope she will get back to me or my mediator today still.
 
It was not made clear if Christine is only returning from vacation today, at home, or at work, I'll phone her around 6pm (central time, since that's the time they are on) and see if she's at work, and if so, will see what she has to say!!
 
>>Lanidar

I don't know where or how to begin.
I'm 61 years old, for many years I've owned my own business's. I was the person who hired and fired employees. I thought myself to be a very good judge of character.
Apparently, I've lost that trait.
In the IM's and the emails that Schankwart and I shared he was less than truthful. I believed him when he promised me that he was not lying and was completely truthful.
I decided to drop out of this when I was told, by Christine ( Cirrus Casino Manager ), that $1560 was the maximum Schankwart was going to get. I told him that we were at a dead end and I thought that he should negotiate with a counter offer. He wanted the $5200.00, no less. I explained to Christine that Schankwart refused to negotiate and wanted the full sum of money. I also explained to Christine that I thought he was being unreasonable and stubborn and I will not be involved any longer. I was truly pissed that he would not even give them an offer. Christine, at all times was kind, considerate and very professional. She thanked me for the effort and we left with a good feeling of one another on a personal note.

I regret EVER getting involved in this. I'm embarrassed and ashamed that I was duped and sucked into this young mans lies. My apologies to you all for my mistake.

Just about here is where Jinnia attempted to help the two parties settle their dispute. I will leave the rest of this thread for Jinnia to finish for she knows better than I what took place.


<<<<<>>>>>​

>>Jinnia

I saw Lanidar backing off from helping Schankwart, and I honestly felt he was owed the money, so I took over his complaint and made contact with Christine and Schankwart through email, PM's and phone.

As the issue progressed Christine accepted to pay Schankwart 50% of the 'winnings' which would is $2100.00.

Schank said he'd agree to $2600.00.
He was told it would be $2100.00 or nothing.

A little more time passed and --

A settlement was FINALLY agreed upon.

Schankwart was given a specific time to perform his part of the agreement.
Schankwart did not fulfill his end within the time frame given.
He was given more time by Christine, and he still failed.
Schankwart posts and leaves it as Cirrus is in complete wrong doing.
That post ended any and all negotiations from Christine/Cirrus.

Schankwart's stubbornness, his refusal to even think he was in the wrong to any degree, or even believing in the possibility he could have made a mistake, kept this dragging on.

And his inability to follow through with his end of the agreement, has now stopped all negotiations.

In my honest opinion, Schankwart had no intentions of keeping to any agreement made, and he played too many games.


From this point forward there will be no further statements of any kind or answers to any questions regarding this issue from either Jinnia or myself, Lanidar.
 
Never a truer word!

Mediation can be difficult - especially when the party you are representing doesn't play a fair game.

Judging from what I have seen here, *Schankwart* was fortunate to be given the opportunity of a fifty percent settlement.

And the word will have spread regarding this thread and the one at WOL and elsewhere started by this guy - as I said earlier, publicity can be a double edged sword if not used carefully.
 
Oh God... Please give me a chance to make a statement on this at least! This is absolutely blowing me off now and I am very shocked to read this!

I will comment on it in a bit as I have zero time right now.
 
Okay...

I am absolutely shocked to read this statement and will try to clear all this whole confusion now!
I have not talked to Lanidar in a several days and now he suddenly jumps on me and is accusing me to be a liar. I have NO clue what he is referring to so please explain this to me, Lanidar!
During this whole thing Lanidar stood on my side but has now apparently changed his opinion all of a sudden.
When Christine offered me her 30% this offer was totally unacceptable for me. I talked to Lanidar about this and he was absolutely cool with that and did not offend me in ANY way for this decision. As a matter of fact he even said that he understands my decision but that I should consider it because it would be "better than to get nothing".

-So why am I "stubborn" now after all...??? What have I "lied" about to you (or anyone else)???

I am sure that something went on in the background here!
Lanidar... Remember what you still told me a several days ago...?? :eek2:


After Lanidar told me that there was nothing he could do anymore I asked him to "lay back" now as he as a matter of fact seriously helped me a lot and with lots of effort! He then "peacefully" stepped out of this issue and everything between him and me was absolutely in order and fine.


A couple days later Jinnia (his partner) stepped up the plate and offered her help.
I experienced her to be a very kind person and as far as I can tell she indeed tried very hard to negotiate a solution between me and Cirrus.

Another few days later Christine apparently then came up with her offer to pay me 50% of my winnings. The "part of my agreement" was to make a public post in all existing threads that this has been settled. I then asked Jinnia (as my mediator) again to please ask Cirrus-Christine what kind of post she is expecting as I was aware of all the questions that would then come up.

After all I decided to ACCEPT her offer for a payment of 50% as I realized after all that my possibilities were limited in this scenario.

I was waiting to hear back from Christine then since I did not want to make any post before I got her clarification of the offer. Unfortunately she then did not respond to me (or better Jinnia) again for a while and so Christine's own "deadline" passed by.
A day later I heard back from Christine that she is "extending her offer for another period" and told me what she was expecting to read in this "public post".
-This is the point now where I made my announcement of this issue to "be settled upon agreement" a few days ago.

I fulfilled every single part of the agreement, never "lied" nor was being "stubborn" at all. Unfortunately though Lanidar does not seem to be willing to explain what has changed his attitude so rapidly.

I put on my public announcement that this was "settled" now and did not blame anyone for anything anymore. I simply wanted to close this issue and get at least 50% of my winnings so this pain would be over.
Apparently though, there seemed to be things going on behind my back that I was not aware of.
Lanidar's post here has TOTALLY surprised me this morning as everything between him and me was ABSOLUTELY fine last time we talked. Now he makes it sound as if it was not... :confused:
Points are being turned around for no reason???


Anyway... I will keep this issue updated until it has come to an end.


Unfortunately "virtual friendships" do not always turn out to be what you expect.


I will check back here again later tonight.
 
The "concilliatory post" business is most likely true - it was also part of the final hashing-out of the dispute I had with them that Cindy handled last year.

My opinion remains that the player isn't owed anything based on the receipt of ineligibility for 30%+ bonus notification he received before playing, but I'm curious about what lies are being alluded to by his battle-weary mediator.
 
Step by step - I'll TRY to keep it short and on track::

[1] Cirrus offered you 30% ($1560)
[2] You refused it
[3] Lanidar grew tired of your refusal to negotiate, so stepped down
[4] I believed you were entitled to half, since you and Cirrus both were to blame
[5] I spoke with Christine and got it to half of the winnings ($2100 = 50% of winnings)
[6] On grounds you make a post and say something along the line of, 'you made a mistake and Cirrus was right" and you was given 12 hours to do this
[7] You agreed, saying to tell them to send you the funds
[8] They said not until you posted
[9] You did not post, you said you wouldn't post until you knew what they wanted you say
[10] I contacted Christine , and she sent something, not for you to post exact wording, but along the lines to what they would like
[11] I sent it to you
[12] You replied asking me if I wrote that or Christine, I told you it was sent to me, in that same email you then asked me if Christine had got back to me at all and what was her offer -- wtf -- That was already agreed upon by you, $2100 and you make a post, they would then send the $2100 to your NeTeller.
[13] You then refused to post what was sent you or anything similar and said you would post your own words, saying you wouldn't sell your 'opinion or attitude' for any amount of money
[14] Your 12 hours to post was way past due, but you still put it off.
[15] Christine gave you more time, 6pm the evening.
[16] You STILL didn't post by that time.
[17] You finally posted in your own words and made it out as if Cirrus was in complete wrong doing, and no blame on you at all
[18] Christine read this, she was speechless as I was, she said negotiations was over due to you not being willing to negotiate, and refusal to hold up to your end of any agreement. Christine then left on vacation.
[19] I didn't tell you she said it was over, for I continued sending her emails about it so she would have them when she returned from vacation, in hopes she might try again
[20] You then posted saying 'jinnia is sorta right' and said YOU were confused -- and again - wtf ??!!

That did it for me, for you continue to play word/mind games with everybody. I sent you an email saying --

I wasn't sure if you were playing games or not, but not to do so with me.

I listed how the events went, not as complete as I just done here, but did list most

I then told you in that same email that everything said back and forth are in the emails, so I don't see where you would be confused, I asked if you'd mind telling me?

I then told you where my confusement came from, it's your inability to go through with what is agreed upon. And performing this, 'I'm confused' act to only delay the time given for you to get this done.

It was not said for you to wait, that Cirrus would tell you what to post, you were told to make a post saying you had made a mistake and Cirrus was right.. etc......short and simple.

You could have wrote something, had it submitted to Cirrus to see if they approved it before you posted, but No, you had to 'cowboy' it, take matters into your own hands and take yet another chance.

Negotiating is when 2 or more people come TOGETHER and discuss, exchange ideas, in this case offers, they are willing to make with the other(s), NOT to do things as one see's fitting for their own cause.

and I told you not to post no more about this issue until I talked with Christine when she returned, or else, I would quit!!

I told you I will not play games, nor will I lie!!

[21] You edited your post concerning Christine, but it was too late, everyone had already read it. Including her

[22] you then edited the post about 'jinnia is sorta right' after I emailed you. And decided at that time I was out of it, I had enough. But I continue sending emails to Christine so she'd have them when she returned from vacation

Christine returned yesterday from vacation, read my emails and she responded saying it was over, no more trying to negotiate with you.

So there it is. Schank refused to negotiate, demanded entire $5200.. FINALLY agreed to $2100 and make a post within 12 hours, he didn't follow through wanting Cirrus to tell him what to post.. if this is true, why in hell did you not then accept what was sent

You don't have one thing to back up what you claim, Cirrus has chat logs showing you were told nothing over 30% bonus could you use. But you took a chance at a generic (marketing) email sent to all players and submitted one for 100% bonus, Cirrus allowed it to go through. So right there says you BOTH are in the wrong, you received you deposit back, they remove the $1000 bonus, balance which was the winnings was $4200, 50% of that is $2100.

Why would you not go through with the 'agreement'!!

I'm sorry Schank, but people becomes tired of being a pawn for you and trying to help, when you absolutely refuse to work at a negotiations!!

There it is, and I'll not post no more about this, but I be damned if I was going to sit back and let Schank continue with his 'I'm confused' game, when he knows damn well where the problem lays for this not getting settled!!!
 
Jinnia...

I will add the essential facts that you forgot to mention, so people know what really went on!



Edit: Dang... Its really late over here now. I will have to clarify this tomorrow.
 
Last edited:
A heads up for Schankwart:

Schankwart, the most prudent thing for you to do now, is to stop arguing your side of this, and keep quiet.

You had an opportunity to get a fair sum of money, but you chose to not accept what was asked of you, even after being told by the person you had helping you, (Jinnia) that this was conditional on the settlement, and her advice to you was to ACCEPT THIS.

You could have gotten a settlement, put an end to this, and moved on.

You chose NOT to. Case Closed. You have lost all credibility with most people that have followed this thread. Cirrus made you a FAIR OFFER. YOU made the decision NOT to abide with a reasonable request.

Move on... you're done. Put a fork in it. :rolleyes:
 
Unicorn... You have NO idea as Jinnia is not explaining/mentioning the parts of the agreement that I COULD NOT accept!
Additionally... Something here has become VERY fishy......



I will explain tomorrow! Need to rest now.
 
Last edited:
schankwart said:
Unicorn... You have NO idea as Jinnia is not explaining/mentioning the parts of the agreement that I COULD NOT accept!
Additionally... Something here has become VERY fishy......



I will explain tomorrow! Need to rest now.
There's a player advocate that calls hissef Bethug.....perhaps he can help you now? :thumbsup:
 
based on what i read, i think posters are jumping on shank a little too hard similarly like others what jump on a casino

i know one thing, if it was me, i would NEVER write a public apology/admission of fault letter BEFORE i receive the promised funds. the reason is obvious: with cirrus's reputation, what's stopping them from negating the promised payment as soon as the player post his apology letter in public?

they would simply say, "hey! we don't need to pay. look, the player made public that is was ENTIRELY HIS FAULT. why should we pay again?"

anything detrimental to my cause, i would only do in this particular circumstance after confirmation of payment...
 
To be fair to Schankwart he did post on the forum that he had agreed to the 50% - the thing is what was it that Cirrus wanted him to post on the furums to enable him to get his 50%?

If it was along the lines of an apology and admitance he was wrong (which would be my guess) I can understand him not been willing to do this if he feels he wasn't in the wrong. In fact why should there be any need to post anything other than the two parties had come to an agreement and the matter was resolved?

I think it's a bit harsh to attack someone for not been willing to post something they don't agree with (i.e. tell a lie in their opinion).
 
bagofmaggots said:
There's a player advocate that calls hissef Bethug.....perhaps he can help you now? :thumbsup:

The advocate you speak of has already offered his help...since he cannot come on here to defend "hissef" (assuming that was a spelling error, and not intended to offend anyone) I will be more then happy to answer any questions, or fill you in on any details you might need. Since the entire world of online gaming, and player advocates are now sitting on the edge of their seats, wondering what "bagofmaggots" has to say. :thumbsup:

Instead of attacking someone, why don't you offer something that might help the situation?
 
m249a said:
The advocate you speak of has already offered his help...since he cannot come on here to defend "hissef" (assuming that was a spelling error, and not intended to offend anyone) I will be more then happy to answer any questions, or fill you in on any details you might need. Since the entire world of online gaming, and player advocates are now sitting on the edge of their seats, wondering what "bagofmaggots" has to say. :thumbsup:

Instead of attacking someone, why don't you offer something that might help the situation?
The whole world? Wow ! I thought I was offering something that might help? Please excuse my spelling, no offense intended.
 
Last edited:
There's a good point being made here (if we can forego the *commercials* and the personal comments for a moment or two)

Players with a legitimate claim shouldn't have to publish glowing testimonials of the casino that delayed their payment in the first place!

We've had similar hassles with the Royal Dutch management, who kept a player waiting for nine months and then expected him to praise them in return for payment. Being a principled man, he told them to what to do with that proposal, and the fight continues.

In Schankwart's case it is perhaps a little different because there is dual culpability, but even there I don't think the player should be forced to post anything more than "I am satisfied with the negotiated payment I have received and now regard this issue as resolved."
 
I just read this entire thread and found it very interesting. But the last two pages of this thread really made me disgusted especially with the poster Jinnia. I know I dont have any credibility on this site as I dont really post here, so I will probably step on some toes here and catch some heat.

Jinnia, what is the matter with you? You are giving Schankwart an attitude because he didnt post what a great casino Cirrus is and how everyone should deposit there? Are you a person who would sell your soul to a casino for a few dollars? or $2100 to be exact? Because that is what you are expecting Schankwart to do. Kudos to you Schankwart for not giving in completely to their demands. Imagine a newbie who has no knowledge about online gambling comes and in and reads this thread and then see a post by Schankwart saying he was completley wrong and Cirrus was completely right. This unknowing newbie just might go play at Cirrus. Now wouldnt you feel bad Jinnia that you just helped lead a newbie to play at a casino that is known for being cons in the past?

I just cant emphasize enough how disgusted I am right now with Jinnia. So extremely disgusted that you can get upset at a person who won't hold their end of a deal, by praising a casino when he knows he wasn't at fault. And like someone else said a few posts above, only a casino that was dishonest and corrupt would hold a players money until they post good publicity for that casino. It's one thing to praise a casino when they go beyond the call of duty, or treat a player right, but to praise a casino just so you can get your money back, is simply sad. And to be angry at someone who didnt praise the casino because that was the "deal" is truly pathetic. I am glad there are still some people in this world who would not sell their souls for $$$'s.
 
[8] They said not until you posted

This condition as a part of agreement is reasonable in this case. Because Schan has claimed all along Cirrus did not notify him of the ineligibility and held the casinos 100% responsible. However, until I hear from Schan the exact mistakes he had made (maybe just a tactic, he really made none?), my stance remains Cirrus is held the final responsibility and therefore ought to pay for more.

[17] You finally posted in your own words and made it out as if Cirrus was in complete wrong doing, and no blame on you at all

Havent read the original posts before edited, so confused quite a bit. Then again, if Schan thinks he is not in the wrong, he CAN refuse to bend down (write a public post he is). In other words, he has the right to not accept an offer when he doesnt see fit. Remember that it should not be regarded as a mercy for Schan to accept the 50% settlement in this case.

I'm sorry Schank, but people becomes tired of being a pawn for you and trying to help, when you absolutely refuse to work at a negotiations!!

The hard work of mediators much appreciated! And I understand your sentiment completely. From the standpoint of the mediators- pushing, case closed & move on- is the best they want, especially when it is free of charge. (Side Note: I always think free of charge is not right. Mediators should charge a basic fee, more for successful. Then anybody does not owe anybody anything. No harm making some money where service lent.)

That said, I dont understand the sudden change of anger of Jinnia & Lanidar towards Schan of his unwillingness to settle. To me, Christine was also playing games when she demanded a 12-hour time frame for the public post and claimed she left on vacation after the expiry. (was she really on vacation nobody knows)

Now, the picture suddenly turns out to be Cirrus is being generous to make a 50% settlement where they are not required to? That, they are just under the pressure of publicity to do so where they are more right?

Confused is what I am!
 
QUOTE From the standpoint of the mediators- pushing, case closed & move on- is the best they want, especially when it is free of charge. (Side Note: I always think free of charge is not right. Mediators should charge a basic fee, more for successful. Then anybody does not owe anybody anything. No harm making some money where service lent.)UNQUOTE

I hope I am misinterpreting this statement, which suggests that no charge mediators are more interested in pushing quickly on than getting a fair settlement for the player.

That is wrong. Mediators who get involved in these disputes to help rather than profit do so conscientiously in my experience, carefully negotiating and truthfully reporting progress....and their recommendations, to the player.

This frequently involves several weeks or even months of activity - hardly "pushing, case closed and move on is the best they want."
 
There's nothing wrong with a pre-determined "clearing up" post acceptable to all parties - my disputes with both Angelciti and Cirrus included this. In the case of Angelciti, I simply gave my word over the phone that I'd post facts a, b, c and d; Cirrus was much the same, except that it involved Cindy in the middle. Since nothing was compromised at my end in the posts, ie. they were factual, I was happy to make them and the casino was happy to pay on the basis of their promised appearance.

And let's not forget that the player is in the wrong here. This seems to be getting overlooked. If Cirrus is requiring that he publically acknowledge his wrong, there is nothing wrong with that - I'd require the same. If they're requiring something along the lines of "I acknowledge the mistake was mine, that I was not entitled to bonus XXX because of reason YYY (although I maintain that based on the coupon's redemption I WAS entitled, clear and categoric warning received from the casino that I was NOT entitled notwithstanding) and I therefore appreciate the goodwill gesture on the part of the casino in agreeing on a settlement", then there is absolutely nothing wrong. If the player continues to insist in his petulant, bull-headed stubborness that he did nothing wrong, then of course he's entitled to nothing.

I can well see where Lanidar was coming from when he finally threw up his hands in frustration; in the circumstances he ran with this for a creditably long time.
 
Last edited:
- pushing, case closed and move on-

Hi Jetset & the mediators- this statement is not offense intended but it still holds true that pushing to make a case closed is really what happened with the mediation job. Otherwise a settlement cannot be reached in several weeks, it would take months. As to the point that no charge mediators are more interested in pushing quickly on than getting a fair settlement for the player, well its likely the reality, although not unethical. Their conscience to make it fair is what I believe, generally speaking. However, mediators getting paid is more patient & more eager to make a fairer deal is also what I believe. This is real life. Like it or not.
 
HKGambler said:
However, mediators getting paid is more patient & more eager to make a fairer deal is also what I believe. This is real life. Like it or not.

Gotta totally disagree with that - if the mediator is paid by the player and getting a % of the agreed payment then I'm afraid they are far from interested in getting a 'fair' deal. The position then becomes a sales job where the mediator clearly has an interest in getting as much $ as possible. Even if they're not getting a % and a flat rate then they are still being paid to look out for the players interests, but still not at reaching a fair conclusion for both parties.

The only fair mediator is one that can be a truly independent and that has no affiliation to either side.
 
QUOTE Otherwise a settlement cannot be reached in several weeks, it would take months. UNQUOTE

Sometimes it does. This is exactly my argument - most of the successful mediators I know (Bryan and Spearmaster included) do it for free and it has no adverse consequence of a rush joib and settlement at any price.

That might be hard for a cynic to understand, but it is a fact.
 
Dirk Diggler said:
...if the mediator is paid by the player and getting a % of the agreed payment then I'm afraid they are far from interested in getting a 'fair' deal. The position then becomes a sales job where the mediator clearly has an interest in getting as much $ as possible...
I agree with this completely. Some mediators take a cut in the aggrieved player's settlement, which causes the mediator to overlook indicators that the player was a fraudster or whatever. The mediator goes for the throat and ends up looking like an ass.

And on the other hand, a player has a case that is already being dealt with by the casino, the mediator solicits the player stating "he'll make things happen", and in the end the player gets the settlement and forks over a percentage to the mediator who was never needed in the first place.
 
caruso said:
And let's not forget that the player is in the wrong here. This seems to be getting overlooked. If Cirrus is requiring that he publically acknowledge his wrong, there is nothing wrong with that - I'd require the same.
Caruso,
I respect your views & opinions on most things you are normally spot on. But I can not understand why you are siding with the casino on this one, and I will never agree with your side of the argument. To repeat:

KasinoKing said:
The casino is the one with all the power here. Surely they have the ability through their software, to automatically block players from claiming coupons they are not entitled to?
Regardless of anything they did or did not say to him via chat or verbally, having allowed the player to redeem the coupon & play with the funds, the casino should pay his full winnings. Anything else is tantamount to theft.

Maybe we should run a poll to see what the other Meister Members think: Who is in the wrong the casino, the player, or 50/50?
 
That might be hard for a cynic to understand, but it is a fact.

Cmon Jetset, why are you so emotional? And theoretical?

Talking about fact. My opinion is based on my real life experience- that I was involved 2 to 3 times in some real estate conflicts that some third-party, non profit making community mediators stepped in to obviously push me for an early settlement which I deemed unfair. Such act is fully understandable and I, of course, can choose to accept or reject the rush.

I dont mean most mediators, free or not, are sacrificing fairness for rush. Of course I know Bryan & Spear had not sacrificed fairness needless to say. I was stating my opinion that it is quite likely where mediators are human & they have limited time & energy. This is not immoral even so. And no one is forced to accept a deal after all. Was I hurting anybody?

Mediators getting paid to look out for the players interests, casino managers already getting paid to look for the casinos interest and why not, they can still reach a fair conclusion. I think its feasible. Getting paid may or may not lead to partiality. Not necessarily. Depending who & how well the mediator is. A biased mediator would not be trusted & qualified as a mediator in the end. I personally feel more comfortable to pay for a mediation service dearly rendered.

Forgive me I could be wrong. Could be that I dont fully understand how the online mediation works. Since this is diverting the main topic, Id better not argue on this any longer.
 
if the mediator is paid by the player and getting a % of the agreed payment then I'm afraid they are far from interested in getting a 'fair' deal.

In real life, mediators are always paid and they are paid by both parties, half and half. Both parties will not engage in any publicity about the dispute, that is part of the point of mediation. Both parties promise to abide by the mediator's decision. That's mediation in real life.

Online, as usually, is reinventing the wheel.

I do mediations for free, but only for players who use my links. I feel responsible for what happens to them because it is my fault they went to this place in the first place. It's customer service to me. It's just good business.

Occasionally I hear of something that I can fix because I have good connections - so then I will do it regardless.

But I am not a watchdog like Bryan, who will mediate for free whether anyone uses his links or not (and you all should do so out of gratitude for the service being there.)

Lanidar and Jinnia did this mediation as a first - and something went wrong. This, of course, happens. Why it happened in this case - I don't really understand what went on. I think there are things I either missed or that are not public.

This particular mediation is kind of odd - Cindy worked with Cirrus for Caruso. Cindy also worked with Schankie regarding some other mediation - I forgot which. Would it not be natural for Schankie to go back to her, or for her to offer to help?

I am not entirely sure of what actually transpired here. But my take is that Schankie and Cirrus are equally responsible, and half the winning would be fair. This is based only on what I have read here.

If Schanke had been a newbie, I would hold Cirrus completely responsible, since it is quite normal to consider a piece of mail to be meant for the recipient. As far as I know there is no disclaimer about agreements reached otherwise. But Schanke is anything but a newbie and has had an ongoing relationship with Cirrus and Christine and should have been aware that they did have a verbal contract.

Regarding what Schankie was supposed to post - I haven't seen a copy. I am waiting for Schankie to return and explain this:

You have NO idea as Jinnia is not explaining/mentioning the parts of the agreement that I COULD NOT accept!
Additionally... Something here has become VERY fishy......
 
KasinoKing said:
But I can not understand why you are siding with the casino on this one, and I will never agree with your side of the argument.
We can pointlessly repeat the same thing over and over; in the interests of bandwidth, I'll say for absolutely the last time: the moment the casino notified the player he wasn't entiltled to BONUS X, he forfeited his entitlement to BONUS X. The player had a responsibility to act as a functioning adult, with memory and logic faculties all in place. That he may not HAVE them is not the casino's problem - nor is it their problem if he decided to chance his arm, and if he won and got denied shovel out a little blackmail ("I'm going to post everywhere and blacken you forever") for good measure. The moment the casino notified him of his entitlements he forewent any rights to his non-entitlements.

Maybe we should run a poll to see what the other Meister Members think: Who is in the wrong the casino, the player, or 50/50?

That wouldn't be an appropriate way to go at all. Loads of blood-letting, all childish and pointless. Cirrus wouldn't be expected to take seriously anything eminating from something like that, and it would devalue the whole Meister setup.
 
Last edited:
Like they say, it ain't over till the fat lady sings. Well, she's been singing for a while. S-man never had much of a chance. The chat sessions are real (remember he challenged these as being faked), he knew damn well what he was doing. Sure, the casino had sloppy marketing which opens them up to abuse (yes - I'm using the a-word). Schankhart abused this to his advantage and then we began to split hairs on whose fault is whose.

An unbelievable amount of time and effort has been put in to this by numerous people - all because of one guy's greed. As far as I'm concerned, this is over - it's like beating a dead horse with a D-handle. (old paratrooper term).
 
casinomeister said:
Sorry - it's a D-handled shovel. A tool for used for digging foxholes, filling sandbags, and beating dead horses.
Or used in such terms, "She/he's so ugly, looks like she/he was hit in the face with a D-handle."
 
casinomeister said:
Or used in such terms, "She/he's so ugly, looks like she/he was hit in the face with a D-handle."
Actually, there are a bunch more - but I can't remember. Perhaps M249a can help me out - but he was infantry - I was a combat engineer.
 
QUOTE I dont mean most mediators, free or not, are sacrificing fairness for rush. UNQUOTE

No emotion here, HK Gambler - I was looking for that statement you have just made which was my point in the first place.
 
We called them e-tools (entrenching tools) A small shovel that folded up into a smaller, pain in the ass. It did alot of jobs fairly, and nothing well...lol

The d (thingy) is used only by engineers.....who were never around when you needed them anyway :D So if we grunts needed to dig a hole fast, we used shape charges and just blew the hell of it....not very tactical, but man can you make a DZ (drop zone) in a hurry with some det cord and c4....ahh the good ole' days. :thumbsup:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Accredited Casinos

Read about our rating system and how it's done.
Back
Top