Unable to provide details?

[zman]

Zman:

If you have the means to display your beef in this forum for folks to see how you have been responded to, Pitch a Fit rather than Pitch-A-Bitch. You've been gambling on line for quite some time, and that Meister offers player negotiations via Max is a wonderful service.

And I know that should you choose Max's clout to Pitch-a-Bitch to resolve your complaint that a successful or not so successful outcome will be posted, but that those reading at Meister will not see how the negotiations go.

Your money, your call, but fight for it Zman.

Thanks mate! I didnt know Max had such a service lol. I will deff PM him. Although $10k isnt really much its a matter of principle here.

Cheers!

 

[maxd]

Its on the PAB page https://www.casinomeister.com/player-arbitration-pab/

I think you misunderstand the phrase "we reserve the right." Maybe Maxd can respond to this issue.

Yes, definitely some confusion here.

The purpose of that clause is to alert the person considering the PAB process that once it has begun, which is to say once the details of the PAB have been received by us, we expect the issue to remain off the boards until we've had our chance at negotiating with the casino people.

The reason for this is simple: if the PAB is between us and the casino people then we have some control over it. Since we're investing our time and effort into getting the thing resolved we feel that having that degree of control over the issue is necessary and appropriate.

Also keeping it off the boards generally tends to put the casino people in a better negotiating mood: their attentions can be focused on getting the thing resolved instead of dealing with the many distractions of trying to keep on top of something that's gone public. The end result is that they tend to be much more likely to help settle the issue if the issue is private. Once it's gone public though the Terms & Conditions tend to set the pace and direction of the issue and that's often far less satisfying to the offended player than what is (typically) possible privately.

As we've all seen, once an issue hits the boards it is notoriously difficult for anyone to control it. At that point we are generally wasting our time if we keep trying to pursue what has become a rapidly moving target involving many parties, most of them hostile.

So, there you have it: we reserve the right to disregard an issue that's gone public because there's often very little we can reasonably do to contribute to it's successful resolution. Our stand is that if the player goes public with it then they've assumed control of the issue: at that point it's best for us to just get out of the way and let them do their best.