Summary of English Harbour situation

[Linus]

The other thing that bothers me - honestly - is that many of the folks who argue EH we should forgive EH, as long as it's an innocent mistake, are also quickest to want to shut the books on a player who makes an innocent mistake of his - or her - own. I don't understand holding players to a higher standard than casino owners. It seems like it should be the other way around.

 

[Simmo!]

Instead, they sent some code to Spearmaster, who argues we should trust them.

I think you'll find all he's done is verify that their explanation is "feasible". He's not telling you what to do at all. Unless i missed something? Where does he say you should trust them?

Also, I think it's still too early to jump to conclusions. No "precedent" has been set - well not yet anyway. Aside from which, how exactly does this board set a precedent per sé without any recognised authority? Whatever is decided will be simply reflected in the opinions and statements of various individuals and the casino will choose how they react accordingly.

 

[Casinomeister]

The other thing that bothers me - honestly - is that many of the folks who argue EH we should forgive EH, as long as it's an innocent mistake, are also quickest to want to shut the books on a player who makes an innocent mistake of his - or her - own. I don't understand holding players to a higher standard than casino owners. It seems like it should be the other way around.

Please point this out. I'd like to see those posts.

 

[Vesuvio]

I think you'll find all he's done is verify that their explanation is "feasible". He's not telling you what to do at all. Unless i missed something?

You made me tackle the behemoth... but for example the following shows that Spearmaster rather than simply verifying the explanation is feasible believes it to be self-evident (he's also asked us to trust him on it).

(In response to: "There's an outside chance [the bug theory] might be what actually happened")

It is not an outside chance at all. In studying the code it is plainly evident - but again this is not possible for me to explain clearly without a lot of skepticism, so as I said there is absolutely nothing more I can do than to post my interpretation of all the issues and let it go. I don't expect EH, or any other operator, will ever allow anyone to examine its code again because of the uproar it has caused. And I have already stated that I don't argue with your right to be skeptical - but then telling me that you don't believe what I am seeing, well, what do you expect from me?

 

[soflat]

... But looking back, I guess I thought they'd have to submit to a complete & independent audit of both their games and their software, if they wanted to win the confidence of their players back.

None of that happened, of course.

Instead, they sent some code to Spearmaster, who argues we should trust them.

Yeah, that goes back to the "Pandora's Box" argument (aka the 'everything is fine, we don't need no stinking audit' argument), wherein it's unreasonable for players to demand that games at the reputable casinos be fair all of the time.

 

[Pinababy69]

The other thing that bothers me - honestly - is that many of the folks who argue EH we should forgive EH, as long as it's an innocent mistake, are also quickest to want to shut the books on a player who makes an innocent mistake of his - or her - own. I don't understand holding players to a higher standard than casino owners. It seems like it should be the other way around.

If you are referring to the Neptune's thread...I'm definitely one of those who believes that thread should die a quick death. It's over...the girl made a mistake, the casino has done what they are going to do and what is within their rights to do under their T & C's.

In regards to EH however, no I don't believe that a mistake should be overlooked, not one of this magnitude (if that's what it turns out to be). At the very least, it's gross incompetence with no guarantees that it will never happen again. And no statement from EH. I'm with you guys on how bad that looks for them. My problem with that thread was the personal undertones that it took on, nothing more. It's an important thread, and I for one, would like to see Spear's final conclusions/report....minus any mudslinging and innuendo from anyone.

 

[Simmo!]

You made me tackle the behemoth... but for example the following shows that Spearmaster rather than simply verifying the explanation is feasible believes it to be self-evident (he's also asked us to trust him on it).

(In response to: "There's an outside chance [the bug theory] might be what actually happened")

He's says there that that is his "interpretation of it". It doesn't say that you should trust EH - to my eyes anyway. I think there's an element of people interpreting things they want to read them, which isn't altogether unsurprising considering the depth of feeling this issue has generated, but it should be recognised IMO.

 

[Simmo!]

If you are referring to the Neptune's thread...I'm definitely one of those who believes that thread should die a quick death. It's over...the girl made a mistake, the casino has done what they are going to do and what is within their rights to do under their T & C's.

In regards to EH however, no I don't believe that a mistake should be overlooked, not one of this magnitude (if that's what it turns out to be). At the very least, it's gross incompetence with no guarantees that it will never happen again. And no statement from EH. I'm with you guys on how bad that looks for them. My problem with that thread was the personal undertones that it took on, nothing more. It's an important thread, and I for one, would like to see Spear's final conclusions/report....minus any mudslinging and innuendo from anyone.

On both points, this reflects my opinon exactly

 

[Slotster!]

I don't agree the thread should die a quick death. I appreciate the posting and the casino's reply - but we should be given the opportunity to discuss whether or not we believe the resolution to be fair, regardless of the actual outcome. Moreover, and again regardless of what we perceive as 'right' or 'wrong', we should be allowed to make our future playing decisions based on the discussions that arise.

I'm in the 'it's a bit harsh' camp, and won't play at King Neptunes in future as a result. Equally, I'm sure there are just as many people who feel the casino did the right thing under the circumstances.

 

[Pinababy69]

I don't agree the thread should die a quick death. I appreciate the posting and the casino's reply - but we should be given the opportunity to discuss whether or not we believe the resolution to be fair, regardless of the actual outcome. Moreover, and again regardless of what we perceive as 'right' or 'wrong', we should be allowed to make our future playing decisions based on the discussions that arise.

I'm in the 'it's a bit harsh' camp, and won't play at King Neptunes in future as a result. Equally, I'm sure there are just as many people who feel the casino did the right thing under the circumstances.

Totally agree with the "bolded" part Slotster, and I respect your right to your opinion, as I do anyone's. My biggest problem with that thread I guess is that there's been 25 pages of discussion, and it's just become a rehashing of the same topic. My solution to that is to just no longer read it...pretty simple.

Someone mentioned this previously...sometimes you just have to agree to disagree, and move on. I couldn't agree more.

 

[Slotster!]

and it's just become a rehashing of the same topic. My solution to that is to just no longer read it...pretty simple.

That's absolutely true, and snap! - I've stopped reading it. Get you completely... I guess I was just referring to the bit at the beginning, and the subsequent discussion.