Just a final update that VRC and Tradition today paid the remaining $2750 of my pending withdrawals and no longer owe me anything except beyond perhaps what they owe all players who were affected by the two issues I experienced at Tradition Blackjack [game rules not matching the felt in Blackjacks paid 1:1 instead of 3:2 and doubling not allowed after a split when the felt clearly stated it was] in addition to the issues I have not personally experienced but which I now learn others like NashVegas have experienced as long as two years ago with pairs doubling instead of being split and whatnot. Without wishing to go off on a tangent, I actually experienced quite a lot of that exact thing at a NetEnt online casino last year but it may have been a server > server > server issue as I was using a VPN – I don’t really understand stuff like that. In any case, the casino manager himself said he checked with NetEnt who informed him they were unaware of any issues and despite my screenshots [which proved either I thought doubling on 16, 18, 19 and 20 was optimal on occasion, even more so than splitting 8’s or 9’s…or that there was some kind of technical bug], he considered the matter closed. And if NetEnt *and* the casino manager both say I am retarded, then that is good enough for me and the matter is now closed. As a sidenote, I’ve played NetEnt Blackjack since then, so they may have – in fact – had a very good read as to my level of retardation.
Warning: 3000 words [some almost *big* ones] below. Only proceed with boredom and/or intelligence.
FML – I gave Bryan my unsolicited word I would not comment in this thread if he would kindly read a 1-2 page email of mine which was pretty much just ranting against injustices [perceived or otherwise]. I am fairly certain he did, in fact, wade through my long rant but I wrote out the below rant under the assumption that he didn't actually unban my account - and I intended to use that excuse to go back on my word. Only to then find [to my aghast] that he did actually unlock my account – and now I have no excuse to proffer. Except the perhaps weak excuse that I’m pot-committed to posting it as what I have to say is important but, more importantly, I worked on it for almost 40 minutes fml…
I’ve been following this thread, and where I was initially uncertain [as to motivations / intent] if the theft occurring was due to malice or incompetence, I now firmly believe it was incompetence / inexperience – with no real malicious motivations in play. I realise it can be hard to accept that so many people, at so many intervals, for so long…could have be so incompetent that a situation such as this could have occurred without malice in the mix, but it simply has to be the case. Nothing in Tradition’s or VRC’s behaviour [that I have seen] has led me to believe they are unethical – just merely shockingly [almost criminally] incompetent. I have opinions on most issues, but deciding how to fairly view or compensate for the devastating results of well-intentioned folk [who are unfortunately inexperienced or incompetent] will always be a hugely complex and philosophical dilemma. I mean, the French lady who owns Tradition could well be one of the nicest people in this [at times] very mean-spirited industry – and if that’s the case, I feel sad that she would be dragged over the coals whilst other large operators [some on the Accredited List on this website] are ripping off players left and right doing things far worse than a felt v game screw-up [albeit one that has gone on for a very long, almost unforgivable, period of time] and yet those Accredited List operators are allowed to continue to get away with daylight robbery without sanction purely because they carry out their malicious operations in a far craftier [if no less obvious] fashion. And I’ve highlighted examples of what I mean previously on this very forum – and been largely ignored.
To Tradition’s owner, I would say the following [if she hopes to continue in this industry – and if she is the person I have a gut feeling she might be, I genuinely hope that she does]:
• You are simply not currently experienced enough in online casino operations [or in commerce] to be running an online casino online. Until you get that experience, you need to hire someone who understands this industry, who understands how to structure promotions so that their acquisition value is not outweighed by their exploitability [just because my play is almost entirely recreational [and I have literally 850,000 ‘witnesses’ to prove it], it would be a very foolish casino operator who challenged me to exploit their promotions – and, on occasion, I would simply sigh to think how easily I could [if I wanted to] and how surely others would [and would certainly want to] destroy yours and VRC’s promotions in ways you cannot possibly understand and in ways I am certain you are currently already paying for or will soon be paying for in the near future
• You need to set up your own Customer Service department with a really bright department head who will train and oversee a small team of intelligent console operators to field customer complaints [I have no idea how much you pay Rival for CS outsourcing or how it’s worked into your licensing contract, but if you can’t understand how the levels of shocking incompetence which are evident in the CS conversations I posted in this thread will only HURT your casino until drastic changes are made…then you should close up shop now, because your casino cannot survive. I am certain you could have a little CS office running in Manila with a hand-picked manager to oversee a bright, motivated, English-speaking team far cheaper than whatever the element of the licensing fee you are paying Rival for the abortion CS they are delivering to your players is costing you – and it’s costing you a LOT]
• You need to understand how to effectively react to incidents which will invariably occur from time to time which require immediate, effective action and lightning fast damage control. If nothing else, this entire experience should teach you that simply *hoping* problems would go away is rarely, if ever, an appropriate or effective reaction. A recent example of decent but very effective damage control for a similar incident was when a losing player on CakePoker was awarded the pot. I actually retain some measure of cynicism regarding the given causes for the incident itself, but the damage control displayed by CakePoker when the screenshot was posted on the largest poker forum in the world was really quite effective – too effective if you ask me – but I estimate the damage was limited to the absolute minimum. You should compare and contrast the specific steps taken by their representative and his public statements with the steps taken by you and with your public statement – and you should pay special attention to the timeline.
• Basically, it’s obvious a lot has gone horribly awry and was allowed to continue to go horribly awry long after it was reported by players. Even though I understand the frustration that is partners causing you stress better than most, when all is said and done, you must wear the blame as the owner / operator. And take proactive steps to address the outstanding issues and prevent their reoccurrence. Or you must hire someone who can. I don’t have the answers for everything, but I am willing to provide free advice to any operator who I believe is ethical and well-intentioned who asks for my advice / opinion on any issue in this industry. I am not an online casino affiliate and I hold no vested interests [not to imply the two are mutually exclusive] and whilst my time and advice is cheaply priced [$0.00 per hour or 5000 words], I would pay myself a lot for it...but if only I was capable of heeding it [which I am not]
• You need to undertake some form of audit to identify all affected players and reimburse them as best you can for ALL hands which were affected [blackjacks underpaid and doubling after splitting not allowed when it should have been]. You need to announce your plans for doing this soon – or, at least, announce plans are being drafted pending the input from 3rd party / independent auditors or whatever [this really is part of effective damage control – and this should have been announced immediately upon your being alerted to the disaster]
• Lastly, thank you for paying my pending withdrawals – whatever the reasons for your doing so. I suspect those reasons were more honorable than self-serving, and if so, I hope you continue in this industry and find success. But unless you learn a great deal fast – or hire someone you trust to manage things until you do – I cannot see how anyone who is realistic and rational in their expectations can possibly hope for any measure of success.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I spoke above about effective damage control, but if I may ramble about fairness some more, NashVegas is – of course – correct in his pointing out the damages are impossible to determine with any level of precision. You couldn’t begin to estimate the real extrapolated impact. I mean, if we use my very melodramatic style of reacting to such things as an example; the damage I personally experienced [and which, as always, I take full responsibility for] was quite substantial as my frustration grew and anger levels increased and throw in some guilt for good measure…over a period of 3-4 days where it seemed not only were they lying, they viewed my attempting to assist as a mere annoyance. I was even more jaded than usual and all-but-certain Tradition and VRC were nothing but crooks who had craftily fooled me with some previous payouts. And when I am jaded, I tend to take 0’s off my net worth – but eh – I only say this to use myself as an example for how these things are never fairly compensated for. And I only make that point to stress to operators who allow incidents to progress without correction that they will never and should never be completely exonerated. As with almost all unfortunate incidents, damage has resulted which is unquantifiable and all one can do to right the wrongs is try one’s best to compensate those who were affected - and then hope for the best.
I believe an independent audit to determine all hands affected and reimbursement of those players along with some measure of believable assurances from third parties that the issues could not be replicated – along with some convincing from the operators that they had taken required administrative measures to prevent reoccurrence – and I would say VRC and Tradition [I cannot speak for other Rival casinos] would be safer to play at than a great deal of the casinos currently on the Accredited List on this forum [if for no other reason than their publishing of Slot payout %’s and use of non-weighted reels – the way I see it, there is only one reason to not publish Slot RTP %’s and there is only one reason to use weighted reels, and that reason should preclude any operator who fails to publish Slot RTP’s or uses software with such reels from being given Accreditation - or the time of day].
The only people who fear transparency are people who have a reason to.
Now to those who would [perhaps unintentionally] steer the serious discussion towards the ludicrous....If the game rules clearly stated Blackjacks paid 1:1 and no doubles after splitting, then there would be no issue. And it detracts from serious / logical / valuable discussion when a player is posting proving they are unable to distinguish between valid and invalid concerns, or who complain about their perceived unfairness of such rules, or complain about max bets being lowered or about whether they think an optional bonus with clearly stated rules is fair, or whether a policy change for comp point accrual for play ND chips is fair, and so on and so on. Those are all completely separate and completely unimportant issues which are completely unrelated to any of the genuine issues brought up in this thread. Those sorts of opinions are puerile and belong in the basket of complaints by players that they have been bonus-banned. Every casino has the right to bonus-ban whomever the hell they want for whatever reason – my issue with being bonus-banned was the timing and my play history meant it was likely nothing but a vindictive act after I’d gone out of my way to be fair and assist VRC. So anyone who’s been guilty of complaining that the correct listed price for a product is unfair in this thread and others should stop that whining. This industry is not a monopoly or duopoly situation – there is no price-gouging going on and we do not need an independent body to protect consumers to ensure competitive pricing via antitrust laws. If you don’t like the listed price, move on to another of the 3000 shops all standing next to each other. And if you have been guilty of complaining about prices in a 3000 store mall all selling the same product, please cease and desist and give yourself a good slap for me, please. No offence.
What this industry DESPERATELY needs is a powerful and independent regulatory body to ensure that customers buying an online casino product at the listed price are not robbed at check-out via direct Virtual-style theft or indirect theft [such as being prevented from cashing out large balances as I briefly but painfully experienced at far more than one casino last year - all while my requested cashout was left accessible for clearly unethical reasons for long periods of time - all whilst CS and managers stalled and stalled and lied and lied about the reasons for the 'delay' – and it is worth noting both VRC and Tradition were never guilty of this; perhaps payments could be a bit faster at both but their delays were not malicious or unethical and this is proven by their auto-flushing the cashouts rapidly after player requests withdrawal – and it is also worth noting Accredited List casinos on this site have and will continue to be guilty of this very admittedly profitable yet morally despicable common industry practice].
This regulatory body [which must be player-driven as online casinos will always be licensed in shady locales for tax reasons] must also serve to protect against all the hundreds of malicious tricks online casinos have available to them should they wish to double-dip; it must serve to protect players from equally damaging if not maliciously-intended incidents which can [and will continue to] occur from gross incompetence and inexperience [to a level where it becomes almost criminal] as displayed by Rival in this thread.
And, of course, in such a regulatory Utopia, players would receive a level of protection from affiliates who would sacrifice ethics at the expense of commercial arrangements with online casinos guilty of any of the above.
But that will probably happen the day Natalie Portman and I get married. And so we beat on, boats into the retarded current, borne back ceaselessly into the repetitive cyclical depressing past…
In the absence of such Utopia, any regulatory or any Player Advocacy organization which would seek to apply indirect regulatory pressure via an Accredited or Recommended list of any kind, could only hope to be effective if transparency was embraced, affiliates were not unfairly protected against accusations of misconduct, and online casinos who sought placement on such a prestigious List were actually subjected to stringent measures which ensure a non-laughable level of auditable transparency.
There is literally only one reason to silence a non-troll and that is if you fear what they may say [and only fools are fooled if the given reasons for silencing such a person are instead simply an overall disinclination to the *way* they may say it – only offensive people get offended, and the word that ironically rhymes with bill is really only offensive to someone guilty of being one]. I am an online poker affiliate and you can call me the s-word until you are hoarse and you can drag me up to answer accusations of misconduct or lack of ethics in operations on any forum in the world and all I ask is notice of such and I shall be there to defend against any such accusations with evidence if it exists and logical arguments if it does not. And I will only be 'offended' if the motivations for the slander are dishonourable or if the slander itself is invalid.
Ethics and affiliate marketing are not mutually exclusive. Yes, ethical affiliates earn less $ - ethics will never be cheap, unfortunately – but that is merely the ironic nature of these things.
But I can genuinely think of only one [valid] reason to not publish RTP %’s on Slots and that is if you fear ongoing audit of your published RTP %’s.
To not subject an online casino to such a simple and necessary requirement [which would enable at least a charade and perhaps even a small measure of transparency, if not really guaranteeing it] before listing them on a Recommended or an Accredited list impresses upon an objective viewer a sense of wonder at how such a glaring oversight could have occurred whilst calls for such a basic requirement only ignored.
And anyone who cannot see the cold truth in the above words is a fool.
Crap. There’s that legendary rudeness I am infamous for. Ship the life-ban Capitan...
