The BitchMeister Blog: it's New! Improved! Old-Fashioned!

[Casinomeister]

One more thing - Max has a vested interest to remain unbiased because this is what makes our complaints section viable.

You need to bone up on what's been going on here for the past several years before spewing spewage. Thank you.

 

[maxd]

What he said!

'sides, it's true. CM pays me to do the PABs. If you're saying that he would interfere with the ruling on a PAB yadda yadda .. well then you're full of it because it ain't so, and basically you know next to nothing about Casinomeister.

Truth is there are a certain percentage of folks out there who simply cannot and will not believe that someone like me can do what I do when there are aff deals and such in the background. Know what, tough toodles! I've been hearing the same bogus accusations since 1998 and they're still bogus!

10 years I've been in the biz and never once, not once, has an aff deal been used as leverage to push me to say -- or not say, or "un" say -- something about a case or issue. Know why? Because it's not worth the hassle. If someone tries to twist our arm that way they get dumped because there's always others more than happy to step up to take their place and not try the arm-twisting game. Besides, they get way more mileage out of being featured favorably on the site than they would by forcing and issue, getting booted, etc etc.

Think about it: how many individual cases have you seen that would be worth that kind of aggravation to the casino involved? Precisely zero, or close enough to it. It doesn't make economic sense and I don't think I need to remind anyone that casinos are not in the biz to be charities.

Oh, but what you might be saying is that they come in and say "you'll rule for us in all our cases", or "most" or "the ones we tell you" or whatever. Ah, have you looked at the PAB records at all? Have you trolled the message boards and found incidents of such abuse? No, I expect not, because neither the record nor the forums show any such thing. In fact (no offense intended) it's basically hot air, a "you bad" theory based on ...? "Nothing" is the word you are looking for there because that's what these "easy to accuse" type things are based on. Well, the simple answer and the only answer such unfounded claims or suspicions or whatever deserve is "where's the proof?" That puts the onus back on you, the accuser, where it rightly belongs. Frankly we've got better things to do, like handle PABs for instance.

Anyway, if you combine the "doesn't make monetary sense" issue with the "we wouldn't do it anyway" issue you get a simple result: it doesn't happen. I know that's stealing candy from the conspiracy theorists and such folk but there it is.

So, WD, your inability to "recognize" our impartiality says a lot about you (again, no offense intended) and not much of anything about us.

 

[WD2810]

Bullshit - plain and simple. Max has no vested interest because he gets paid to do a job whether it's an accredited casino or not. And in my opinion, he does a damn fine job.

--

Total bullshit.

Impartiality or neutrality is a two-edged sword. You could think that it's just that either someone is impartial in a given issue, or he's not. But it's not that simple. There is also a question of whether someone appears to be impartial or not. For example, in a court of law there might be a case against a company that sells doors, and the appointed judge occasionally moonlights legal services for a doorhandle manufacturer that frequently sells handles to that door company. Now, it may very well be that the judge can be completely impartial in the issue - after all his link to the door company is weak - but he still may have to recuse himself because he can appear to have a conflict of interest and therefore be biased.

Obviously CM is not a court of law and that example is pretty far fetched, but I think it demonstrates my point. Even if you are completely impartial in this case, you simply must understand those that see Rushmore's customer flow and your bottom line having a correlation also to see a possibility for you to become biased.

In Finland we have an old saying that loosely translated goes like "whose bread you eat his songs you praise". I'm sure MaxD is a good employee (or if he has a piece of CM, a hard-working owner) and good employees are loyal to their employer. In the past I've been let's say less than 100% honest towards some customers because I had to be 100% loyal to my employer to keep my job.

No one is asking you to recuse yourself or anything like that, nor is it in anyone's best interest, but this Rushmore case has pretty unique charasterics and therefore I think you should be a bit more thick skinned when someone raises questions of your impartiality.

 

[maxd]

WD, you don't understand the economics of it. Let's say there are 100 people banging on your door asking for a car wash. When you go to sign him up guy #5 says, "Oh ya, I want a blowjob before I'll pay you". Know what happens? You say "good luck with that sir" and you skip guy #5 because the next customer has fewer unreasonable demands and is ready to step up. It's simply not worth the hassle.

I know what you're saying: follow the money and you'll see what motivates people. In some cases that's certainly true and can be interpreted as you have done. In other cases though, like ours I might say, it's worth a lot more to us to be impartial than it is to be crooked for pay. In the long run we earn more, stay clean and hold a position that no one else can touch. It's money in the bank!

I would say this: such sayings as "you sing songs for the guy that pays you" depend entirely on the payment being scarce enough that you need, or are driven, to do it in order to survive. Basically none of that applies here.

As to thick skins for being called crooks, try this: I think you are a coward who is trying to pressure us into ruling in your favour because you probably cheated the casino yourself. Your PAB is lies and should be tossed out right now if for no other reason than your ungrateful attitude and groundless accusations. ... See how unfounded accusations and attacks can be irksome? Nobody who has worked hard and honestly to earn their position likes to be called a deceitful crook but anyone, least of all in public, and certainly not by someone who is saying "oh, by the way, can you help me out here?"

 

[WD2810]

I agree that your (CM as a whole) history is very reputable.

The reasons why throughout this process I've felt this case has maybe not received as impartial care would be:

- You've posted no warning whatsoever on your site about Rushmore and continue to promote it as if it was business as usual. I think a general warning of "Reports of non-payments; you may get tangled in fraud investigations that drag on for months, even if you've done nothing wrong, with zero response from Rushmore customer service". Of course you could've phrased that in more PC terms, but the message should be stated somewhere. Isn't just the fact alone that there's a flood of PABs against a accredited casino a reason to move it from the accredited to, I don't know, maybe "under scrutiny" category.

- In especially Casinomeister's input there has been an exceptionally pro-Rushmore tone, for example his video blog where he basically claims that Rushmore is the victim here and everyone has tried to defraud them. He makes no mention that there are several innocent individuals, most likely many more than there are fraudsters, who have got their moneys seized by the casino.

 

[maxd]

Sorry to poke holes in your balloon but so far the fraudsters VS legit cases are about 50/50. In other words there are a disproportionately high number of fraudsters being caught out in the investigation. That would indicate that they're doing the right thing and for the right reasons.

Also let's be perfectly clear, we are talking about less than a dozen Rushmore related cases over the past 4-6 months, including those that have already been settled. You wouldn't know this because you don't deal with a high volume of PABs but that is not "a flood". It's certainly more than a trickle but no, it's not a "flood". And what percentage of the total Rushmore customer base do you think we're talking about here? Miniscule! So, to keep things in perspective we have tried to balance the needs of the outstanding PABers with the Rushmore customer base as a whole, etc. Have we been fair, appropriate and balanced? Damn straight we have!

As to not being warned do you want me to go back and count all the posts that have been made telling people that this thing is dragging on? I've been 100% up-front about the dates these were filed, the progress that has and has not been made and results as they come in. If a prospective Rushmore customer is unable to find that trail of information then they simply aren't looking very hard.

At this point I suspect there are more links on the site to Rushmore's ongoing investigation issues than pretty much any other single casino. It's a veritable fishnet of Rushmore cross-links! The customers have been well informed at every step of the way! IMHO if you want it done differently start your own site and good luck to you!

And finally your "you need not recuse yourself or anything like that", etc. You've got to be kidding! You say "You do have a vested interest in shining good light on Rushmore's actions" and so forth and then say we need not feel that we have to recuse ourselves? What planet are you dialing this in from? Accusations like that on a forum _must_ be countered immediately and with extreme prejudice or the next post will be "aha! you didn't deny it!" and so forth.

You stepped way over the line and now you're getting called on it. Suck it up sweat pea, you asked for this one!

 

[Artico]

"Also let's be perfectly clear, we are talking about less than a dozen Rushmore related cases over the past 4-6 months, including those that have already been settled."

This is the thing I dont understand. So few cases... and this has took almost 4 months from them. These kind of things will bring them just bad publicity and make them look like amateurs. They do have good reputation in this forum and yet it seems they dont treat customers like professionals. For me it feels that they are ignorant because this thing has taken so much time maybe their business is going so good that they don`t have to care about low-rollers or something.

When you sum the time taken and mistakes and excuses in my case, it feels almost as no-brainer to put some sort of warning for them. Of course maybe you even do this when this is all solved. Hopefully next week we all are a bit wiser.

 

[Tengil]

Worth to remember is that there are many that are awaiting the results of the so called investigations (stalling IMO) before they PAB.

And about the "investigations", last time I checked the year was 2009 not 1909. And basically they could just say that the address didnt match without anyone knowing the truth.

Lastly to those affected Im pretty sure maxd is quite frustrated too.

 

[RobWin]

What I don't understand about all this is; Why are Casinomeister and Max having to take all the heat here? Where is the Rushmore Rep and voice in this ongoing thread?

A few more regular and updated posts here from Rushmore could definitely help the demeanor of the route this thread is going.

 

[maxd]

You won't hear me argue about that. I'm just sayin' ....

@Artico: As to "few cases, happen faster" you misunderstood. They are investigating a lot of players, of whom only 12-ish have PABs. Since they're hiring investigators in a bunch of countries, gathering many written reports etc I say again that it doesn't happen before tea time. Maybe it should be happening sooner, but I trust you see my point: it's not a trivial undertaking.

@spiderlegz: yes, they could just be lying and then ... yadda yadda yadda. Of course they could be lying but there's no evidence of that so why bother saying it? I _could_ be a barking transvestite, or a googly-eyed alien .. or you! "Could" is thin stuff to be calling out the dogs over.

 

[Casinomeister]

...You've posted no warning whatsoever on your site about Rushmore and continue to promote it as if it was business as usual...

This has already been addressed in this thread. How would I word the warning? How about this?: WARNING FRAUDSTERS - Be careful not to submit bogus info in your casino account or you'll get caught out.

Or how about: warning, if your account is locked, you may have to wait a long time for it to be unlocked?? Makes no sense. It's not a warning since those horses have already bolted from the barn. It serves no purpose.

Warnings are just that - to let players know they need to proceed with caution. In my opinion, I don't need to warn players about anything. There are a number of members posting positive experiences, to counter this with a warning would seem rather bizarre, wouldn't it?

Like Max said, there are only a handful of aggrieved players, maybe you're dolphins caught in the tuna net, maybe not. We have shared the information that has been given to us; I have read the reports from the detectives - it's meticulous - and I think the casino is trying to be as fair as possible. They could have said eff-it, and thrown your cases into the FU clause bin, but no - they didn't. They actually want to investigate each and every one of these accounts and pay those that deserve to be paid.

That is nothing to warn anyone about; the casino should be commended for it.

- In especially Casinomeister's input there has been an exceptionally pro-Rushmore tone, for example his video blog where he basically claims that Rushmore is the victim here and everyone has tried to defraud them. He makes no mention that there are several innocent individuals, most likely many more than there are fraudsters, who have got their moneys seized by the casino.

Reality check: It wasn't the casino committing fraud against players, it was players committing fraud against the casino. I was talking about fraudsters. I was speaking about fraud and identity theft, not about the accounts that are in the investigation queue. Fraud was the topic, not Rushmore.

What I don't understand about all this is; Why are Casinomeister and Max having to take all the heat here? Where is the Rushmore Rep and voice in this ongoing thread?

We are only taking heat from two or so members. I think we can handle this.

The casino has been giving us information as it comes in, and we've been disseminating it as well. Believe me, we've got much more on our plate besides this issue. As far as I'm concerned, it's being taken care of. Slowly for sure, but it's happening.

 

[Jasminebed]

I am not personally involved in this issue, but I must agree that the timeframe of Rushmore's investigations is taking extraordinarily long. If sending private investigators to the door to verify identity is their means of ascertaining whether someone is a fraudster or not, what happens if you are not at home?

I also don't understand why this is happening serially in the various countries, as opposed to employing agents to investigate simultaneously. If agents of the casino are flying from place to place, being lodged, etc, surely this represents enormous cost to the casino, which in turn will be passed back to its player base of predominantly honest players.

IMO it is doubtful that those players who have now received their withdrawals thanks to the help of Maxd and CM's PAB service would have their cheques in hand yet without this valuable service.

I believe there are visitors and guests to this site that do not read all the threads, but rely on the lists and banners to choose venues to play at or avoid. I don't feel a warning would have been inappropriate given the lengthy process Rushmore's investigation has turned out to be.

 

[Tengil]

You won't hear me argue about that. I'm just sayin' ....

@Artico: As to "few cases, happen faster" you misunderstood. They are investigating a lot of players, of whom only 12-ish have PABs. Since they're hiring investigators in a bunch of countries, gathering many written reports etc I say again that it doesn't happen before tea time. Maybe it should be happening sooner, but I trust you see my point: it's not a trivial undertaking.

@spiderlegz: yes, they could just be lying and then ... yadda yadda yadda. Of course they could be lying but there's no evidence of that so why bother saying it? I _could_ be a barking transvestite, or a googly-eyed alien .. or you! "Could" is thin stuff to be calling out the dogs over.

We are not talking about peanuts here. Given that they previously lied to some players like Artico (and others) I at least cant be 100% sure that all players get fair treatment.

And as WD2810 said, they could have verified the Finnish accounts in a couple of minutes. So the over 4 month "investigations" against Finns is just BS IMO.

 

[maxd]

Latest BitchMeister Report is up: Link Outdated / Removed.

Basically it's an update on last weeks Report: Rushmore continues, Westland Bowl VS Hereos almost a done deal, Fatbet moving toward resolution, and of course The Numbers.

 

[WD2810]

News

I got a phone call today from a Finnish speaking person whom I gather Rushmore had hired to seek out Finnish players. He wanted to know if I had been asked to sell my ID for $$$ or anything like that. I of course said no which is the truth. He was pretty clueless about online gaming in general - e.g. he had never heard of Moneybookers before. Anyway, he said then he will pass on the information he got from me right away.

He also wouldn't say or possibly didn't even know who had acquired his services, as I had to spell R-U-S-H-M-O-R-E to him. He just said that his employer seems to be concerned with ID theft and that possibly a rogue casino has sold people's ID's to fraudsters.

I hope this call yields action from Rushmore soon.

 

[Artico]

News

I got a phone call today from a Finnish speaking person whom I gather Rushmore had hired to seek out Finnish players. He wanted to know if I had been asked to sell my ID for $$$ or anything like that. I of course said no which is the truth. He was pretty clueless about online gaming in general - e.g. he had never heard of Moneybookers before. Anyway, he said then he will pass on the information he got from me right away.

He also wouldn't say or possibly didn't even know who had acquired his services, as I had to spell R-U-S-H-M-O-R-E to him. He just said that his employer seems to be concerned with ID theft and that possibly a rogue casino has sold people's ID's to fraudsters.

I hope this call yields action from Rushmore soon.

Rushmore seems to be run by amateurs. Accredited casino ffs. Hiring private investigators for sure, seems like some rent-a-cop calling who doesnt know anything about gambling. And that questions proves you are not fraudster and this took 4 months. Just hilarious.

If somebody in general calls me like that I dont tell him nothing. Why would I? They should clearly identificate themselves.

 

[maxd]

... seems like some rent-a-cop calling who doesnt know anything about gambling.

Why would identity verification have anything to do with knowing about online gambling, or Rushmore ... or even how to plug in the internets?

Poke fun all you like but so far your jibes seem pretty unconvincing and ill-informed.

 

[Artico]

Well it would be nice if they said who hired to make a call, wouldn it? Ofcourse now I know this prosedure I do answer their questions. But if hadnt read this forum I probably not. That is what I mean. No need to take it personally maxd I have no intend to criticize you with those comments.

 

[maxd]

Well it would be nice if they said who hired to make a call, wouldn it?

There I will agree with you, at least insofar as no one should be expected to give personal information to a total stranger who is unwilling or unable to identify themselves. Such identification should at least include showing that they are associated with some organization which the player would know.

If someone came up to me and asked me that stuff I'd ask what it was about. If they couldn't provide a reasonable answer I'd probably tell them to go bother someone else.

That said, expecting them to answer a pop quiz about online gaming isn't very realistic either.

 

[maxd]

This week's update is posted: Link Outdated / Removed

Summary: Rushmore pays, Strykke is Rogued, and as ever The Numbers: 4/3/1/1/2/2 for those of you who are keeping score.

 

[Artico]

Their investigator seems to be still celebrating Labours Day since I have not received phone call. Wondering how many people he has to call. If the questions are those already mentioned it should not take too long even with hundred people.

 

[Casinomeister]

Their investigator seems to be still celebrating Labours Day since I have not received phone call. Wondering how many people he has to call. If the questions are those already mentioned it should not take too long even with hundred people.

Well, you've just received a two week vacation for violations of rules 1.11 and 1.15. See you when you come back

Hopefully...

 

[Tengil]

Well, you've just received a two week vacation for violations of rules 1.11 and 1.15. See you when you come back

Hopefully...

While I somehow can understand violation of rule 1.15 I dont see how he has violated rule 1.11.

A warning could have been more proper.

 

[maxd]

I dont see how he has violated rule 1.11.

That person has repeated tried to turn this thread into a debate over their own personal issue with Rushmore. I believe that 1.11 items "harassing members with agenda laden posts" and "consistently ragging on a casino that did you wrong" apply in spades here.

Making others aware of your issue is one thing, being a pissy whiner is quite another.

 

[Casinomeister]

While I somehow can understand violation of rule 1.15 I dont see how he has violated rule 1.11.

1.11 - Please do not exploit this board to promote your own personal agenda. If the moderators (and members) feel that you are ... consistently ragging on a casino that did you wrong, etc., your account may be suspended.

Seems pretty clear to me. I feel I've been tolerant enough with the hijacking of this thread. This thread concerns Max's updates to his blog - not the Finnish investigation by Rushmore.