[Wild Speculations] Ecogra dispute service closed?

[siganto34]

Does Ecogra service still exist? Made a complaint with them more than a month ago.
Received a confirmation email same day:

Dear xxxxx,

I appreciate the effort you have made to contact eCOGRA and explain your predicament. I will contact the customer service team at Golden Riviera to follow up on your query today.
At this time I would like to ask that you adhere to our dispute mediation rule – “We ask that you do not place posts regarding the complaint on any forums nor should you seek assistance from another third party service while we work your case. Either of these will result in the immediate termination of our assistance.” Once your dispute has been resolved please feel free to post any comments you may have in connection with this query.
Kind Regards,
Tex
--------------

Now wait , wait and wait. Nothing happens. Wrote to them
several times- no response.

 

[Jasminebed]

I suggest you edit your post to hide the casino name. You don't want to jeopardize ecogra's involvement, and it says not to post to forums in meantime.

 

[hakapuku]

I suggest you edit your post to hide the casino name. You don't want to jeopardize ecogra's involvement, and it says not to post to forums in meantime.

What can he jeopardize if Ecogra is not responding him for more than a month?

 

[maxd]

Does Ecogra service still exist? Made a complaint with them more than a month ago.

There's no reason to believe that eCOGRA has closed its doors. Something like that would be big news and there's nothing like that going around, afaik.

If they haven't responded to you that might be because they're busy with your case and a whole lot of others. I know very well how that feels.

A case being in process for a month may seen like a long time to the player but for us in the industry four weeks is barely a ripple on the waters, there may well be a whole lot more involved and it could go on for some time. I've had some cases on the books for as much as two years before they are properly resolved. Sure, that sucks, but it is what it is.

 

[hakapuku]

There's no reason to believe that eCOGRA has closed its doors. Something like that would be big news and there's nothing like that going around, afaik.

If they haven't responded to you that might be because they're busy with your case and a whole lot of others. I know very well how that feels.

A case being in process for a month may seen like a long time to the player but for us in the industry four weeks is barely a ripple on the waters, there may well be a whole lot more involved and it could go on for some time. I've had some cases on the books for as much as two years before they are properly resolved. Sure, that sucks, but it is what it is.

But they could at least reply to OP's emails.

 

[maxd]

But they could at least reply to OP's emails.

We don't know the situation any more than what the OP has told us. Maybe he's a pest. Maybe he threatened them or was abusive. Maybe they're just too damned busy. Maybe he's full of it and they're done with him. Could be anything, no? Best not to jump to conclusions. And never assume anything.

As it happens I understand that eCOGRA has recently responded to OP in some detail. It's probably not what he wanted to hear but them's the breaks.

 

[siganto34]

We don't know the situation any more than what the OP has told us. Maybe he's a pest. Maybe he threatened them or was abusive. Maybe they're just too damned busy. Maybe he's full of it and they're done with him. Could be anything, no? Best not to jump to conclusions. And never assume anything.

As it happens I understand that eCOGRA has recently responded to OP in some detail. It's probably not what he wanted to hear but them's the breaks.

Maxd, I don't understand why do you say all that? I am a pest? I threaten and abused somebody? May be, may be? May be I am the one who killed JFK? My story is exactly as I told it. Got problems with a casino. Made a complaint with Ecogra. Got confirmation that my case is dealt with. Then total silence for a month and a half. Numerous emails sent by me- no single reply. That is why I think Ecogra is not functioning anymore.

 

[Nifty29]

Maxd, I don't understand why do you say all that? I am a pest? I threaten and abused somebody? May be, may be? May be I am the one who killed JFK? My story is exactly as I told it. Got problems with a casino. Made a complaint with Ecogra. Got confirmation that my case is dealt with. Then total silence for a month and a half. Numerous emails sent by me- no single reply. That is why I think Ecogra is not functioning anymore.

He said MAYBE.

 

[maxd]

He said MAYBE.

Indeed. What I presented was a random list of possible explanations. I could as easily have said that aliens might have invaded eCOGRA and the staff were unavailable because they were being subjected to rude and unusual experiments. Would you then have said that I believed in alien abductions? If so you'd be woefully missing the point.

Maybe the attempt at humour got lost in translation but the point is that there can be any number of reasons why someone does not or chooses not to respond to emails. Saying "well at least they could respond" expresses a number of groundless assumptions about a process that most of us have very little insight into. And you know what they say about assumptions: "don't assume because it makes an ass out of you and me". Okay, that's a stupid and annoying expression but the point is that assuming things about something that you can't possibly know anything about is unwise, at best.

For example, most of my job here at CM is sending and receiving emails. It is not unusual that someone will email me and I will choose not to repond. Sometimes it's because I'm busy gathering what I need in order to respond in full. Sometimes it's because I've already responded at length and don't care to repeat myself over and over. Sometimes it's because I've already told the person that I've said all I'm going to say and I've moved on to other things. Sometimes it's because they have a habit of being a PITA and I don't care to waste more time on trying to them happy.

So, you see there are many reasons why I might choose not to respond to an email. Sure you could still say "well at least you could respond" to which I'd say "you do my job and then tell me how you can spend 6-8 hours a day working on PAB cases and then 6-8 hours a day sleeping plus 6-8 hours a day having a life and then some number of hours responding to the many emails that come in every day that need responding to and then there's all the emails that don't really need a response but it might be nice if you could". The point is that you respond to the high priority and necessary stuff and you do the courtesy emails when you can. Them's the breaks. Give me another 8 or 10 hours in the day and things might be different. Until then it is what it is. I suspect the same is true for the folks at eCOGRA, but I'm only guessing.

As to the OP's particular case I know for a fact that eCOGRA have looked into and responded to his case in some detail. I also know that the nature of their response is unlikely to please the OP. So the OP comes here and tries to fling poo at eCOGRA? That's called "a personal agenda" and our Posting Rules have very specific restrictions on such things.

PS. Thread title amended to better reflect the true nature of the content therein.

 

[siganto34]

Now that is very very strange! I never received any email from ECOGRA regarding the resolution of my case. And at the same time you, Maxd, know that I did receive it. And you insist on this and you call me a liar. What an absurd situation. So I repeat: I NEVER RECEIVED ANY EMAIL FROM ECOGRA since 15.10 when
they sent me an email confirming the receipt of my complaint.

Here are a couple of my last emails to them:

12 of november: "Hello! I have sent you my complanit one month ago. Why you don't reply me since?
Please, update me "

18 of November: "Hello! Do you have any update for me?"

Is it impossible to understand from these email that I did not get any information from them?


So may I ask you, Maxd, if you are in so close contacts with Ecogra that they discuss my case with you (even without any permission given to them by me)- then ,may be ,you could ask them to resend what they have sent to me and what I have never received? May be that is a better option than calling me a liar? And it seems that this is the only option left because they totally ignore my emails.

 

[maxd]

... if you are in so close contacts with Ecogra that they discuss my case with you (even without any permission given to them by me)- then ,may be ,you could ask them to resend what they have sent to me and what I have never received?

You came HERE to complain about THEM so it's totally fair game for us to go to THEM to ask about YOU and your case. They gave us a general description of the situation which answered the questions here sufficiently for me to post as I did.

If you don't want people looking into your business then keep your business to yourself. If you post about your business on a forum such as ours then you can assume people will start asking questions and seeking answers.

Unless of course you really have no interest in having the "questions" you've asked answered at all, you'd rather just bitch and complain and -- as previously mentioned -- fling poo. Well then, that gets us into the realm of you being a troll and, again, the forum Posting Rules have very specific things to say on that subject too.

That said I will mention to them that you claim to have not received their response regarding your case. I'm sure they'll be happy to resend that to you. If however it turns out that you are full of BS and have in fact received their response then it will be my grave and unpleasant duty to kick your ass to the curb.

 

[maxd]

In case this is a wild case of misunderstanding I have a proposal: file a Pitch-A-Bitch (PAB) regarding your case and we'll look into it in detail for you. Of course this does grant us access to the details of your case so if there's anything you'd rather not have us looking into this may not be the best course of action for you.

However, if you decide against the PAB route I'd have to caution you against further posts regarding eCOGRA's supposed failings. The bottom line is we know that they have looked into your case and responded to you in detail. You claim this is not true which can only mean that either you are lying, they are lying or there's something wrong with your email. In either case this should be looked into since you've chosen our site to complain about them. If that is not going to be an option -- which is to say you decline to file a PAB -- then we're at a deadlock here and as such further comments about what eCOGRA has or has not done for you are not appropriate.

Links to the PAB process are in my signature. I heartily encourage you to proceed ASAP, beginning with the FAQ.

 

[Tirilej]

There are things in this thread I just can't understand so I feel I better ask if anyone else are wondering the same.

What could the OP gain by asking about Ecogra here? He didn't really post a complain as I see it. He was just asking a question because he was worried and didn't know where to turn. At least that's how I read it.

Also I don't understand how you Max new who he was so that you could ask them about his case.

I hope it's valid questions. Sometimes I don't understand no matter how much it gets explained. I blame the strange language of yours

 

[siganto34]

You came HERE to complain about THEM so it's totally fair game for us to go to THEM to ask about YOU and your case. They gave us a general description of the situation which answered the questions here sufficiently for me to post as I did.

If you don't want people looking into your business then keep your business to yourself. If you post about your business on a forum such as ours then you can assume people will start asking questions and seeking answers.

Unless of course you really have no interest in having the "questions" you've asked answered at all, you'd rather just bitch and complain and -- as previously mentioned -- fling poo. Well then, that gets us into the realm of you being a troll and, again, the forum Posting Rules have very specific things to say on that subject too.

That said I will mention to them that you claim to have not received their response regarding your case. I'm sure they'll be happy to resend that to you. If however it turns out that you are full of BS and have in fact received their response then it will be my grave and unpleasant duty to kick your ass to the curb.

So if they tell you that they have sent the response- you will ban me on this website? That would be weird. When I say that I did not receive anything from ECOGRA - does it mean that I want to spoil their reputation? I only want to get a response from them- not more and not less.
And, by the way, could you be more polite when talking to somebody you don't even know personally? I mean all that "kick your ass" bs.
And regarding your proposal- would not it be easier just to send me their reply? Or they send it to me again or they send it through you, for example.

 

[maxd]

There are things in this thread I just can't understand ... I hope it's valid questions. ....

Questions are good, no problem there.

To begin, we asked eCOGRA about the OP because of his posts here. They knew the case and were thus able to comment.

What would the OP have to gain? If the OP is a fraudster, of simply a pissed-off player, then they could be trying to pressure eCOGRA. (good luck with that!) Or, as I've said, they could be simply trying to bad-mouth eCOGRA by posting (non)questions like "do they still exist" etc.

The point is that if the OP were really "asking questions" then the questions have been answered and they would or should be satisfied. Since that's obviously not the case then what are they after? That's where the speculations over motive come into this.

From what we hear from eCOGRA there is a hell of a lot more to this case than the OP has divulged here. So much so that a PAB is very much called for, IMO. See my previous post for more on that.

So if they tell you that they have sent the response- you will ban me on this website?

If they have proof that you received their response then there's a very good chance that you have been lying and yes, that probably would get you banned.

I only want to get a response from them- not more and not less.

I'd say your posts here have been aiming to accomplish a lot more than that but let's assume for the moment that what you say is true. No problem, I've alerted them that you apparently have not heard from them and they will almost certainly try to contact you again. Assuming that works then "mission accomplished", no?

... could you be more polite when talking to somebody you don't even know personally? I mean all that "kick your ass" bs.

If you come out of this as clean as you pretend to be then I will make my apologies. So far everything I've seen and know tells me you are not what you claim and that you are abusing your membership here to serve your own ends. Of course I may be wrong but I've been in this business a long time and have earned the right to trust my instincts, to a point. Instincts or no one should never be too hasty.

... would not it be easier just to send me their reply?

Easier for whom? Without a PAB on the table we don't have your permission to ask for things like emails and such, doing so at this stage would be inappropriate. Besides which how would that solve anything? As I've said, either you are lying or they are lying or you have serious email issues. Us becoming your replacement email service doesn't address any of that, certainly not to my satisfaction.

 

[skiny]

The OP says he received a confirmation email around a month ago and then two weeks ago he emailed for an update and didn't receive an reply.

What changed? His spam filter? His email address?

I'm pretty sure if eCogra came to a decision they would have no reason to hide it from him. That would be defeating the purpose of doing an investigation. Something still doesn't seem to add up.

Either Max is talking to eCogra about a completely different person or somewhere in about a 2 week span after the complaint was made something stopped allowing him to receive emails that he was clearly able to receive before the investigation started. (Both of these actually sound a little strange to me.)

But at the same time, if the OP did receive the results from eCogra, what could possibly be gained by simply saying he didn't receive the information? That's all the original post said. Surely he doesn't think that saying he doesn't have the information will change the result.

It's impossible to prove someone received an email because spam filters can delete emails without you even knowing what they were. I would suggest resending the information and once the OP has confirmed he has it, case closed.

It might be accompanied with a suggestion that in the future if you're not receiving emails that you're expecting from a reputable source you might want to consider a more mundane reason. If I send my boss an email and don't receive a reply, I don't assume he's quit, dead or fired.

 

[maxd]

I have it from two independant sources now that the OP is a known advantage player, works with a group of others, and has been booted from at least two well-known casino groups for this activity.

Everyone knows, or should know, our position on advantage players: we see no reason to condemn them UNLESS the Terms specifically prohibit their kind of activity. That has been precisely the case with the OP at both of the fore-mentioned casino groups. In other words the OP has broken the Terms and suffered the consequences. Since this has been an organised and repeated activity I seriously doubt that any of the fallout from it is news to the OP.

I suggest that in future the OP might well assume that if he continues with such activity and subsequently suffers at the hands of other casinos that the reasons should be obvious: many casinos do not appreciate advantage play and you'll get brusk treatment from them if you so indulge.

As to the wayward email it seems that eCOGRA has read the OP's request and has passed their response to us to forward to the OP, which I have done. Assuming that has been received I imagine we may well have come to the end of our little journey here.

Finally I should say that the window of opportunity for a PAB from the OP has passed: given his activity and his track record for repeating it I think the end result of a PAB is pretty much a foregone conclusion and not something we'd care to waste time on.

And last but not least the OP should know that an apology will not be forthcoming: I said your case stank and it does. You are an advantage player, part of an organised group of players and I seriously doubt this is the first time you've been shown the door at a casino because of it. You know very well what you did and why the casino took action against you. You've wasted eCOGRA's time, my time and I dare say our readership's time with your bogus "all I'm trying to do is get an answer" BS. So yeah, to the curb you go, as previously promised albeit for slightly different reasons. End of story IMO.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I have it from two independant sources now that the OP is a known advantage player, works with a group of others, and has been booted from at least two well-known casino groups for this activity.

Everyone knows, or should know, our position on advantage players: we see no reason to condemn them UNLESS the Terms specifically prohibit their kind of activity. That has been precisely the case with the OP at both of the fore-mentioned casino groups. In other words the OP has broken the Terms and suffered the consequences. Since this has been an organised and repeated activity I seriously doubt that any of the fallout from it is news to the OP.

I suggest that in future the OP might well assume that if he continues with such activity and subsequently suffers at the hands of other casinos that the reasons should be obvious: many casinos do not appreciate advantage play and you'll get brusk treatment from them if you so indulge.

As to the wayward email it seems that eCOGRA has read the OP's request and has passed their response to us to forward to the OP, which I have done. Assuming that has been received I imagine we may well have come to the end of our little journey here.

Finally I should say that the window of opportunity for a PAB from the OP has passed: given his activity and his track record for repeating it I think the end result of a PAB is pretty much a foregone conclusion and not something we'd care to waste time on.

And last but not least the OP should know that an apology will not be forthcoming: I said your case stank and it does. You are an advantage player, part of an organised group of players and I seriously doubt this is the first time you've been shown the door at a casino because of it. You know very well what you did and why the casino took action against you. You've wasted eCOGRA's time, my time and I dare say our readership's time with your bogus "all I'm trying to do is get an answer" BS. So yeah, to the curb you go, as previously promised albeit for slightly different reasons. End of story IMO.

I am a little uncomfortable that merely being an "advantage player" as opposed to a "mug punter" is enough to have someone dragged out into the street and shot. The terms about "professional gamblers" that are often seen in casinos mean very little, as there is no such thing as a "professional gambler" unless one is a bookie.

What isn't made clear by the OP is whether they actually had money (winnings) confiscated retrospectively, or it was merely a case of the casinos "reserving the right to refuse admission".

The CM standards for accredited casinos cover how casinos should handle "too clever" punters, which is to pay them and then ban them, not use "professional gambler" or "spirit of the bonus" arguments to void winnings after being quite happy to take the bets when they lose.

Where does one draw the line between legitimately playing to win (advantage play), and fraud (cheating in order to guarantee a winning outcome in the long term).

It does look like the OP just didn't agree with the decision made by eCogra, so tried to smear them by suggesting that they no longer dealt with complaints, rather than the more traditional direct attack on the casino in the forums in order to pressure them into reconsidering.

The OP may also have wanted eCogra to tell him how the casinos detected that he was not only an advantage player, but had a few friends doing the same. I wonder if the casino and eCogra took the action they did was down to there being a group of friends involved, rather than a simple case of a lone advantage player vs the casino.

I am sure there are plenty of us here who play with a view to winning, even though most of the time we end up losing, who would be worried that playing to win is now enough to have eCogra rule in favour of a casino in a dispute.

 

[maxd]

The info I have is that in both cases winnings were denied because of specifically proscribed play patterns. In other words there's no speculation or presumption here, it's simple Terms violations and the consequences thereof.

Regular readers should know that I don't particularly like such Terms at casinos. I believe that "betting pattern" Terms are basically predatory and are needlessly corrosive to the player's experience. HOWEVER I also believe that every casino has the right to set the conditions under which they will accept player action. If Casino Schmo decides that they don't want players who wear frilly underpants then that is their business, however ridiculous such a restriction may be. It's not my place, nor I believe is it anyone else's place, to tell them then CANNOT make such rules. All anyone can reasonably do is vote with their feet and take their business elsewhere. And so they should if they find the Terms uncomfortably restrictive or cramping of their preferred play style, frilly underpants or otherwise.

And so it is with "betting pattern" Terms. If you don't like 'em then don't accept 'em, play elsewhere. But if you DO accept them and proceed to play and violate those Terms don't bitch and moan about them being there in the first place. If you accept the Terms then you are in for the ride, like it or not.

So, in the cases we're talking about here the casinos have specific rules against certain kinds of play patterns. They're specific enough that in my opinion the casinos can't arbitrarily say "pattern betting!" and hover up the player's money. Those Terms name and detail specific bets and betting patterns, not generic hand-wavy player activities. In both cases the OP specifically played contrary to those rules and as such deserves the stick that comes for having done so.

 

[hakapuku]

The info I have is that in both cases winnings were denied because of specifically proscribed play patterns. In other words there's no speculation or presumption here, it's simple Terms violations and the consequences thereof.

Regular readers should know that I don't particularly like such Terms at casinos. I believe that "betting pattern" Terms are basically predatory and are needlessly corrosive to the player's experience. HOWEVER I also believe that every casino has the right to set the conditions under which they will accept player action. If Casino Schmo decides that they don't want players who wear frilly underpants then that is their business, however ridiculous such a restriction may be. It's not my place, nor I believe is it anyone else's place, to tell them then CANNOT make such rules. All anyone can reasonably do is vote with their feet and take their business elsewhere. And so they should if they find the Terms uncomfortably restrictive or cramping of their preferred play style, frilly underpants or otherwise.

And so it is with "betting pattern" Terms. If you don't like 'em then don't accept 'em, play elsewhere. But if you DO accept them and proceed to play and violate those Terms don't bitch and moan about them being there in the first place. If you accept the Terms then you are in for the ride, like it or not.

So, in the cases we're talking about here the casinos have specific rules against certain kinds of play patterns. They're specific enough that in my opinion the casinos can't arbitrarily say "pattern betting!" and hover up the player's money. Those Terms name and detail specific bets and betting patterns, not generic hand-wavy player activities. In both cases the OP specifically played contrary to those rules and as such deserves the stick that comes for having done so.

I don't agree. The problem with those TCs is that those are NOT specific. Here is a typical example of those rules:
"The casino reserves the right to withhold any withdrawals and/or confiscate all winnings for irregular play. Irregular play includes, but is not limited to, any one or more of the following types of play:


- equal, zero or low margin bets or hedge betting for bonus play-through requirement purposes
- placing single bets equal to, or in excess of 30% or more of the value of the bonus credited until the wagering requirements for that bonus have been met "

So what ,except for 30% part, is SPECIFIC here? Equal betting? Zero betting? Hedge betting? What is that? Where is an exact definition of those "betting styles" ? You will not find it anywhere at the casinos' website. Can you find LESS specific rules than these rules?

 

[vinylweatherman]

The info I have is that in both cases winnings were denied because of specifically proscribed play patterns. In other words there's no speculation or presumption here, it's simple Terms violations and the consequences thereof.

Regular readers should know that I don't particularly like such Terms at casinos. I believe that "betting pattern" Terms are basically predatory and are needlessly corrosive to the player's experience. HOWEVER I also believe that every casino has the right to set the conditions under which they will accept player action. If Casino Schmo decides that they don't want players who wear frilly underpants then that is their business, however ridiculous such a restriction may be. It's not my place, nor I believe is it anyone else's place, to tell them then CANNOT make such rules. All anyone can reasonably do is vote with their feet and take their business elsewhere. And so they should if they find the Terms uncomfortably restrictive or cramping of their preferred play style, frilly underpants or otherwise.

And so it is with "betting pattern" Terms. If you don't like 'em then don't accept 'em, play elsewhere. But if you DO accept them and proceed to play and violate those Terms don't bitch and moan about them being there in the first place. If you accept the Terms then you are in for the ride, like it or not.

So, in the cases we're talking about here the casinos have specific rules against certain kinds of play patterns. They're specific enough that in my opinion the casinos can't arbitrarily say "pattern betting!" and hover up the player's money. Those Terms name and detail specific bets and betting patterns, not generic hand-wavy player activities. In both cases the OP specifically played contrary to those rules and as such deserves the stick that comes for having done so.

I have checked the terms for Golden Riviera and they don't have much in the way of specific prohibited playing patterns.

They DO have the max bet rule, which prohibits bets larger than 29.999999999% of the bonus credited, along with a 100 bets before being allowed to withdraw rule for the SUB. The rest are rather more vague, such as "if it is deemed by management......." terms regarding "abusive play" or "professional gambler", and the somewhat open ended "low/zero risk betting patterns".

However, there is no ban on frilly underwear, blue hats, lucky chips, etc, so I should be OK

I wonder whether this is more about the collusion than mere advantage play. The terms governing advantage play threaten increased WR, loss of future promotions, account closure; but the confiscation of winnings seems to be reserved for more serious cases that would probably be deemed "fraud", perhaps along the lines of "multiple accounts" due to "gnoming", rather than this really being a group of friends each playing on their own account.

This would have come out in a PAB, so there was probably no serious intent on the part of the OP to proceed with one.

The plus side is that I have now reviewed the terms at this group, just in case this was a sign that something nasty had been added, but it hasn't. The only "nasty" I spotted was a 50x WR on slots, rather than the more usual 30x seen at most Microgaming casinos. It would have to be next to impossible therefore to violate the 100 bets rule for the SUB whilst at the same time making WR, even if betting 100% of the bonus balance or more each time.

 

[maxd]

I don't agree.

I said I believed the Terms I was looking at -- not the Term you quoted by the way -- were specific enough for the cases at hand. Since you don't know the specifics involved I'm afraid the relevance of your speculations escapes me.

If what you are saying is that you don't like such Terms then I encourage you to avoid casinos that use them.

As to disagreeing with specific cases that I have seen and taken action on I'll repeat myself and ask (albeit rhetorically) how your opinion on something you know nothing about could possibly be relevant.

As to hedge betting and the others they do, in many cases, have an actual definition and meaning. One can analyze a player's betting sequence and say whether they were employing those types of bets or not. Not good enought for you? Great, again I say avoid casinos that have such rules. Disagree that such betting terms actually mean something? Great, talk to the hand, I've got work to do.

 

[Cleveland]

Equal betting? Zero betting? Hedge betting? What is that? Where is an exact definition of those "betting styles" ? You will not find it anywhere at the casinos' website. Can you find LESS specific rules than these rules?

I know this might be mind blowing for you but maybe....I dunno....ask the casino? , Especially if you have already been kicked from other casinos for a style of play.

Poor player. Cry me a river. I've been to the forums same as many of you. They discuss how to beat the casino and warn of the risk of being banned. We all know what many of these players are doing. Plenty of forums that won't ban the player for this sort of thing. Many of you are members there ...

 

[skiny]

However, there is no ban on frilly underwear, blue hats, lucky chips, etc, so I should be OK

Does frayed all around the edges count as frilly?

I don't shop much.

 

[Nifty29]

Does frayed all around the edges count as frilly?

I don't shop much.

Frilly?

I'm a frayed knot.

 

[hugh.r.walker75]

I know this might be mind blowing for you but maybe....I dunno....ask the casino? , Especially if you have already been kicked from other casinos for a style of play.

Poor player. Cry me a river. I've been to the forums same as many of you. They discuss how to beat the casino and warn of the risk of being banned. We all know what many of these players are doing. Plenty of forums that won't ban the player for this sort of thing. Many of you are members there ...

Amin

 

[maxd]

In case anyone has been holding their breath waiting to hear what happened here -- ha! -- I can report that we haven't heard a blessed peep from the OP. No chockies, no flowers, no heartfelt "thanks" for forwarding that email he so desperately wanted. Nothing, not even icecream. I'm not feeling the love here. :sob:

 

[skiny]

In case anyone has been holding their breath waiting to hear what happened here -- ha! -- I can report that we haven't heard a blessed peep from the OP. No chockies, no flowers, no heartfelt "thanks" for forwarding that email he so desperately wanted. Nothing, not even icecream. I'm not feeling the love here. :sob:

If he's not replying to emails it must be something serious.

Alien abduction, maybe. Spontaneous combustion?

I wonder if he even still exists.

 

[maxd]

I wonder if he even still exists.

Me too! Keeps me up at night. If this story was any sadder I'd disown all my posessions and go live in a hole somewhere.

 

[hakapuku]

Finally I should say that the window of opportunity for a PAB from the OP has passed: given his activity and his track record for repeating it I think the end result of a PAB is pretty much a foregone conclusion and not something we'd care to waste time on.

.

There is something I don't quite understand. So you banned the OP at Casinomesiter. Then you wrote that there is no chances for PAB. And then, 3 days later, you ask about why the OP (who is banned) is silent and why he did not file PAB ?

 

[Nifty29]

There is something I don't quite understand. So you banned the OP at Casinomesiter. Then you wrote that there is no chances for PAB. And then, 3 days later, you ask about why the OP (who is banned) is silent and why he did not file PAB ?

Ermmm...the OP has been banned in the past few days.

You'll have to go find another "poor innocent player" case I'm afraid.

 

[hakapuku]

Ermmm...the OP has only been banned TODAY.

You'll have to go find another "poor innocent player" case I'm afraid.

the OP was banned 3 days ago on 26 of November. That is for sure.

" You've wasted eCOGRA's time, my time and I dare say our readership's time with your bogus "all I'm trying to do is get an answer" BS. So yeah, to the curb you go, as previously promised albeit for slightly different reasons." Maxd post, November 26.

 

[maxd]

As it happens hakapu is pretty much correct regarding the dates. I'm sure he bunks with the OP so he'd probably know.

There is something I don't quite understand. ....

As I recall the genesis of the post was something like:

• write everything up to an including the "window has passed" bit.
• get new info from contacts re: the OP.
• forward the OP the email he wanted.
• go back and review the case, decide the OP is toast.
• update the post to include the boot notice.
• (some days later) decide the post needs an update re: silence from the OP.

Voila! Not sure why you would give a fat rat's arse about any of the above but there it is, hope it floats your boat.

And FTR I did not come back 3 days after I banned the guy to ask (publicly) why he had not PAB'd. That would be a bit dim, no? Either you are being creative with the facts or you woefully misunderstood something somewhere along the way. Respectfully suggest you clean your glasses and try again.

 

[Nifty29]

the OP was banned 3 days ago on 26 of November. That is for sure.

Well you might be right. I don't know for sure....how do YOU know for sure?

The OP was given several opportunities to PAB which they declined.

Max implied that there was clear evidence of fraudulent behaviour in the information provided by eCogra and, as such, decided that a PAB was pointless...and hence the OP was banned...and rightfully so.

Since you are adamantly defending the OP, based on as much information as the rest of us have (which is a small portion only), what extra evidence do YOU have to bring to the table? Or are you just championing yet another fraudster? It seems you take these fraud cases VERY personally.....hmmmm...

Are you on the bottom or top bunk?

 

[hakapuku]

Well you might be right. I don't know for sure....how do YOU know for sure?

The OP was given several opportunities to PAB which they declined.

Max implied that there was clear evidence of fraudulent behaviour in the information provided by eCogra and, as such, decided that a PAB was pointless...and hence the OP was banned...and rightfully so.

Since you are adamantly defending the OP, based on as much information as the rest of us have (which is a small portion only), what extra evidence do YOU have to bring to the table? Or are you just championing yet another fraudster? It seems you take these fraud cases VERY personally.....hmmmm...

Are you on the bottom or top bunk?

Fraudulent? There was nothing fraudulent mentioned about the OP's actions. Now when the OP is banned for 3 days already, you and Maxd can say whatever you want. And Maxd will even ask- "why is OP so silent? He must be a fraudster!". I really don't like what I see and what I read in this thread. My feeling of fairness is getting seriously damaged.

 

[maxd]

My feeling of fairness is getting seriously damaged.

That's pretty rich coming from one of the biggest trolls on our forums. Almost everything you post is intended to damage, defame, and undermine the reputation of your host(s) and this site. As I recall you've received multiple infractions for such. And you have the brass to grumble about a bruised "feeling of fairness"?

Remember that little phrase of yours when you've finally gone one step too far and get the boot for good. That "feeling of fairness" is what you should be thinking about every time you post here. Without that you'd have been a fading memory a long time ago.

If hypocracy made one's head explode I reckon you'd have made a proper mess of your troll hole this morning.

As to my post about the OP's silence:

• it was a joke. In truth I could care less if I never hear from or about the guy again. Somehow I doubt I'll be so lucky but that's another issue.
• the OP's "complaint" here was complete BS. Whether he had received his "get stuffed" email from eCOGRA or not the bottom line is that he had been booted from at least two major casino groups for his advantage play activities. He knew exactly what he was doing and what to expect from his eCOGRA efforts, email or no.
• his purpose in posting here was not to get an email from eCOGRA. It was a blatant attempt to use our forums as a platform to damage eCOGRA. My purpose in pointing out that he'd said nothing after having received the email he said he wanted was that he (almost certainly) never gave a damn about the email in the first place, he wanted to damage eCOGRA and that was as far as his interest in the subject went. That done, job done, he's a ghost. And yes, typical fraudster behaviour.

If fraudsters -- and their friends -- don't like being treated bruskly then they should behave better. Otherwise they get the stick they've got coming, sometimes.

 

[skiny]

Me too! Keeps me up at night. If this story was any sadder I'd disown all my posessions and go live in a hole somewhere.

Someone should call his local authorities and report this.

"Hell, officer? I'd like to report a missing person.

"How long has he been missing? It's hard to say.

I emailed him several days ago and he hasn't replied....

... Hello?"

 

[maxd]

Quite!

 

[Tirilej]

Now I feel I have to defend Hakapuku a little because what he ask and say here is thoughts I've had myself.
I have sent pm's to Max questioned almost everything he have said in this thread so I get the suspicion

The difference is maybe that I've trust in what Max is doing and what he's dealing with.
It must be tough when you want to think people are good and they aren't. On the other side you can also understand why people are doing these things. At other places they learn how to beat bonuses. They learn that it's ok to try and fool the casinos. They learn that this place is horrible where we always defend casinos, are bought, and well there are some not nice words said about this forum and the people here.

Maybe sometimes I can think that it's not ok to make fun of these people since they are just humans like you and me. They just have been though the wrong etics.

So I believe the OP was a fraudster or at least that he tried to win in a not so fair way. He's purpose with coming here I won't speculate about since I'm not in his head.
So please keep up your good work Max, and sorry, I don't mean to question you again, just explain my thoughts

 

[maxd]

I well understand that some of the things said, and done, here would be totally unreasonable if an average, innocent person were the recipient. But the point is that not all who post seemingly innocent stuff here are what they claim. As such the treatment they receive may be decidedly brusker than how we'd handle a Joe Average situation.

Whether one wishes to debate the term "fraudster" or not the basic truth is that a goodly number of folks out there are dedicated to bending, twisting and breaking casino Terms -- and our forum Rules -- for their personal gain. They have a definite motive, profit driven, to both appear innocent and vigorously attack those who would expose and/or thwart them. And so it is that our dealings with them often come down to us-vs-them confrontations. For instance, you'll often notice that they work in teams -- person A will post something and if it gets questioned then persons B, C and D will suddenly pop up put of nowhere to cry of oppression and mistreatment -- and we have to be doubly vigilant to determine the legitimate responders from the muppets.

To put it bluntly we deal with a lot of liars, cheats and thieves both here and off the forums and that sometimes makes us look like the bad guys. All I can ask is that anyone who decides to judge us look at the situations from arm's length and without assuming anyone's guilt or innocence. Just ask "what gain is being sought?" I respectfully suggest that a fair percentage of "innocent complaints" are anything but when you sniff out the facts and the motives behind the stories being presented.

In my day-to-day work on PABs I deal with this sort of thing -- and often these very same people -- on a regular basis. And unfortunately the situation is getting worse year by year: fraud-related cases were around 20% five years ago, today it's closer to 40%, maybe more.

As for the gangers from elsewhere that conspire there to do damage here I have no sympathy: they are vandals and thugs. In the real world there are laws and police to deal with such criminal activity but here on the web we largely are left to fend for ourselves. And so we do. If sometimes that makes us look like the aggressor that is unfortunate but under the circumstances aggressive action is often our only effective defence. Not an attractive spectator sport sometimes I know but the alternative -- letting them run the show -- is not an option.

 

[Tirilej]

Well, we who don't know, can still not read your mind or the OP's mind. We haven't seen anything.

But by being sarcastic or to make fun of someone that can't defend themself don't look so good in my eyes.
I've made mistakes in my life too, and some really bad stuff, believe it or not. I'm still not an evil person.

I will continue to believe in the good in people.

I will also continue to trust you.

There are a lot of rough things being said in this forum, but there is a lot of love in it too

 

[hakapuku]

I well understand that some of the things said, and done, here would be totally unreasonable if an average, innocent person were the recipient. But the point is that not all who post seemingly innocent stuff here are what they claim. As such the treatment they receive may be decidedly brusker than how we'd handle a Joe Average situation.

Whether one wishes to debate the term "fraudster" or not the basic truth is that a goodly number of folks out there are dedicated to bending, twisting and breaking casino Terms -- and our forum Rules -- for their personal gain. They have a definite motive, profit driven, to both appear innocent and vigorously attack those who would expose and/or thwart them. And so it is that our dealings with them often come down to us-vs-them confrontations. For instance, you'll often notice that they work in teams -- person A will post something and if it gets questioned then persons B, C and D will suddenly pop up put of nowhere to cry of oppression and mistreatment -- and we have to be doubly vigilant to determine the legitimate responders from the muppets.

To put it bluntly we deal with a lot of liars, cheats and thieves both here and off the forums and that sometimes makes us look like the bad guys. All I can ask is that anyone who decides to judge us look at the situations from arm's length and without assuming anyone's guilt or innocence. Just ask "what gain is being sought?" I respectfully suggest that a fair percentage of "innocent complaints" are anything but when you sniff out the facts and the motives behind the stories being presented.

In my day-to-day work on PABs I deal with this sort of thing -- and often these very same people -- on a regular basis. And unfortunately the situation is getting worse year by year: fraud-related cases were around 20% five years ago, today it's closer to 40%, maybe more.

As for the gangers from elsewhere that conspire there to do damage here I have no sympathy: they are vandals and thugs. In the real world there are laws and police to deal with such criminal activity but here on the web we largely are left to fend for ourselves. And so we do. If sometimes that makes us look like the aggressor that is unfortunate but under the circumstances aggressive action is often our only effective defence. Not an attractive spectator sport sometimes I know but the alternative -- letting them run the show -- is not an option.

So it is only us (the casinos and Casinomeister) and them (the players) ? That is kinda interesting. Once Casinomeister
presented itself as a "player's advocate". Now it looks that this advocate changed his client for the opposite side.
So in your picture it looks like "the casinos" are always the good and fair ones and the players are those who try to cheat them.
Offcourse , it would be stupid to say that there are no many players-fraudsters out there trying to scam casinos.
But on the other side- it would be also stupid to say that the casinos are always managed by saints and are always
fair. And their motivation is no different than any player-fraudster's motivation: PROFIT. So the truth must be
somewhere in the middle- and not totally on the casinos' side (as it is clearly shown in your last post). Casinos do lie, casinos do cheat,
casinos do steal players' money! And when I read you it feels like I read a casino manager, not "players' advocate".

 

[Nifty29]

Well, we who don't know, can still not read your mind or the OP's mind. We haven't seen anything.

But by being sarcastic or to make fun of someone that can't defend themself don't look so good in my eyes.
I've made mistakes in my life too, and some really bad stuff, believe it or not. I'm still not an evil person.

I will continue to believe in the good in people.

I will also continue to trust you.

There are a lot of rough things being said in this forum, but there is a lot of love in it too

Thing is tirilej...

Since NONE of us have ALL the facts, we can choose to either:

1. Form our own opinion based on a small portion of the truth

2. Form our opinion based on the assessment of others, with a PROVEN track record of fairness and ethics, who HAVE seen ALL the facts.

In other words, we can either take the word of some blow-in who can't lie straight in bed and has a history of fraudulent behaviour at other sites, OR we can take the word of people who we know and (should) trust.

If you want to take the OP at their word, that's your choice. Personally, I'll take Max's word over some bozo with an agenda any day.

I think people forget that there have been MANY operators rogued and/or called out for shady practices here over the years, and many of them the result of a PAB. Hardly the MO of people who "always take the casino's side".

Insofar as not taking shots at a banned fraudster....well IMO they have forfeited the right to any kind of respect by lying to me and trying to gain my sympathy and assistance....and treating the forum as a vehicle to propogate their fraudulent behaviour.

 

[DepositSpinLose]

please stop this bullsheet topic!

hey mods please stop this topic! I am so tired of checking in to see if anything means anything just to find that is was as useless thread to start with.

gee tanks for your attention to my stupid request to a stupid thread.

Deposit(manytimes)Spin(usuallylessthanRTP)Lose(96%ofthetime)

 

[Tirilej]

Thing is tirilej...

Since NONE of us have ALL the facts, we can choose to either:

1. Form our own opinion based on a small portion of the truth

2. Form our opinion based on the assessment of others, with a PROVEN track record of fairness and ethics, who HAVE seen ALL the facts.

In other words, we can either take the word of some blow-in who can't lie straight in bed and has a history of fraudulent behaviour at other sites, OR we can take the word of people who we know and (should) trust.

If you want to take the OP at their word, that's your choice. Personally, I'll take Max's word over some bozo with an agenda any day.

I think people forget that there have been MANY operators rogued and/or called out for shady practices here over the years, and many of them the result of a PAB. Hardly the MO of people who "always take the casino's side".

Insofar as not taking shots at a banned fraudster....well IMO they have forfeited the right to any kind of respect by lying to me and trying to gain my sympathy and assistance....and treating the forum as a vehicle to propogate their fraudulent behaviour.

I agree with what you're saying, apart from the last sentence. But that's me and I think that there is a need for both of us in this world and in this forum. I also knows that both you and Max are really nice people

With my posts I was maybe not clear enough that I did not believe in the OP. I believe what Max says is the truth.

I just wanted him to understand that with being so rough in his posts maybe that it will have the opposite effect than what he wanted.
Honestly I get a little scared myself and I often wonder if I really have the guts to speak up my mind. I still do it and I try to not regret it afterwards.

 

[jetset]

Is it not time to put a fork in this thread - it really has outlived its usefulness imo?

 

[maxd]

Is it not time to put a fork in this thread ....

Sure, why not. It's not like anyone is hoping to achieve enlightenment here or the like.

If anyone has something they feel they need to add just drop one of us mods a note via PM.