The Bakhmut thing is turning into yet another embarrassing disaster for Ukraine.
... There's nothing embarrassing about defending your own territory. The Ukroids should go back across the border. They are fighting mainly on territory where the people already voted to join the RF. The people have spoken. Looks like coke-head-in-chief has now canceled further Ukrainian election until further notice. Gee, I wonder why. If they were smart the Ukroids would have long ago made some good defensive lines in territories that Russia doesn't care about and crossed their fingers that the cost would be to high for Russia to take them militarily and that they could keep a bit more of a rump state when this thing is wrapped up. But they are not. Oh well. Imagine invading someone else's, fighting for two years only to lose twice as many lives and ultimately fail at taking the city. That would be embarrassing. And save the "oh no that was Russia's plan the whole time." You aren't that dumb.  Hard to know why you didn't put a link to the clown-shoe 'data' you generated. http://my.ass/laughable_western_propaganda.pdf ? Not Ukraine losses are likely over 300,000 KIA with a positive 2nd derivative lately due to the feeble 'greatest counter-offensive'. The killed ratio is probably around 10/1 in Russia's favor (which is what happens when you can lob shells and 1500 kg bombs on an enemy from safe-ish rear area zones AND the leaders of the losing side want 'their people' to disappear and stop being a drag on the country's technocratic future. One of the reasons why the Ukroids lie about casualties to such a ridiculous degree is that the management can grift more money out of the U.S. as wages for dead people and pocket the money the families would get when their males get killed by keeping the deaths secret. Even more profitable when the missing in action are also missing organs, teeth, and other body parts. As I read, Ukraine did some significant 'liberalization' to the laws around organ donations just in time before kicking off the current conflict with Russia. How convenient. Fuckin ghouls. [/quote] Besides your usual "Some people are saying" and Incel conspiratard video blogs with 1000 subscribers, any source to back up your numbers, or that suggests Russia has had fewer killed in action in Bakhmut or since the war started? I'm sure each side exaggerates the death count of the other side, but I think it's pretty well understood that Russia has had far more killed in action than Ukraine, and especially in Bakhmut. The invader almost always has a higher death count and for months Russian prisoners were being used as bait. Either way. As of right now, Russia is losing ground. Ukraine is gaining ground. A couple weeks ago it was looking like Russia was path to take Bakhmut by victory day. Now it's more likely they don't take it at all. And the counter offensive hasn't even started yet. |
|
|
|
|
You're not going to get your losses refunded so quit wasting your time.
Morally, legally, logically, you are not owed anything. How much you wagered doesn't matter. What you're trying to do is free roll the casino. You gambled and lost. If you would have won, you would have been paid. When you did win you were paid. In the end, you lost overall. They didn't take your money, you gambled it and lost.
Imagine if all you had to do to get your losses refunded from Stake is play from a prohibited jurisdiction. Think of how many players would be lining up with their hand out. They'd go broke.
Obviously they aren't broke, which means you're wasting your time.
|
|
|
|
The Bakhmut thing is turning into yet another embarrassing disaster for Ukraine.
It's a diaster for both sides. There's nothing embarrassing about defending your own territory. Imagine invading someone else's, fighting for two years only to lose twice as many lives and ultimately fail at taking the city. That would be embarrassing. And save the "oh no that was Russia's plan the whole time." You aren't that dumb. |
|
|
|
Yeah Kari Lake just can't stop winning. In mid-February, the Arizona Court of Appeals rejected Lake’s assertions, concluding she presented no evidence that voters whose ballots were unreadable by tabulators at polling places were not able to vote.
The state Supreme Court declined on March 22 to hear nearly all of Lake’s appeal, saying there was no evidence to support her claim that over 35,000 ballots were added to vote totals. Earlier this month, the court sanctioned Lake’s lawyers $2,000 for making false statements when saying more than 35,000 ballots had been improperly added to the total ballot count. https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/kari-lake-election-challenge-proceed-arizona-officials-99294309I mean whining. Thank you for pointing out (through your link) that Kari Lake and her attorneys are having an affect. The poor judges just don't know how many times they can throw out her case(s). I mean, they are having to consider the PEOPLE. If the people believe Kari Lake, the judges could be in trouble. Let me explain. If there is some possibility that Lake is right, one, single, legal accusation against a judge can raise investigations into the judge and his qualifications. A judge can be barred from not only the bench until this investigation is at least completed. But he can be potentially barred from his tenure... which amounts to $millions in retirement. What this means is that the State Supreme Court is not only protecting itself, but it is protecting Judge Thompson by remanding the case back to him. He will need to come up with more and better excuses this time. If he doesn't, Lake just might win by something like a default.  You seem confused. After Lake lost the election, she filed a lawsuit with over a dozen arguments on how it was rigged. The first court threw all her arguments in the trash for various reasons, but mostly because they were just dumb and didn't come close to proving her case. The appeals court also threw her entire suit in the trash the same way. And they fined her lawyers thousands of dollars for acting like a bunch of fools and wasting the courts time with all these stupid arguments. One of her arguments, the one about signatures, was thrown in the trash without even being considered after they ruled it was filed too late. The supreme court did the same. All of her arguments in the trash, because they were idiotic arguments and she couldn't prove anything she was claiming. Except....they disagreed with the appeals court that the argument about signatures was filed too late. They didn't think it was too late. So they sent it back to appeals so that it could be thrown in the trash for being an idiotic argument instead of being filed too late. So now we will watch as this lawsuit goes down the same path as that kooky Brunson suit, or all of Sidney Powells Kraken suits, or Trumps lawsuits against Comey, Clinton, the NY Times, CNN, etc... Laughed out of the court room because there are no valid arguments, just a bunch of losers crying about losing.   |
|
|
|
Where do things really stand?
Seems like momentum has swung back in Ukraines favor. Russian media reported that two Russian Mi-8 helicopters, a Su-34 bomber, and an Su-35 fighter crashed in Bryansk Oblast on May 13, which some Russian sources claimed was caused by Ukrainian air defenses. Geolocated footage shows the aftermath of crashes near Surestskii Muravei and Klintsy, about 50km from the Ukrainian border.[11] Russian milbloggers speculated that all four aircraft crashed as the result of a coordinated Ukrainian strike using air defense systems pulled to the border area of Chernihiv Oblast.[12] The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) has not yet responded to the incident at the time of publication. Ukrainian officials have similarly refrained from commenting on the incidents. However, several Russian milbloggers seized on the incident to criticize aspects of how the Russian aerospace forces conduct air operations and to accuse the leadership responsible for these aircraft of gross negligence and incompetence. Milbloggers warned about Ukrainian capabilities and called for harsh retaliation against Ukraine. Some milbloggers questioned why the two Mi-8 helicopters were flying so close to the border in the first place and called for aerospace commanders to take better steps to move such assets further into the rear.[13] Moscow Duma Deputy Andrey Medvedev warned that Ukrainian counteroffensive actions will not manifest only in mechanized warfare, suggesting that Russian authorities should prepare for further strikes on such aviation assets as part of a wider Ukrainian counteroffensive strategy.[14] Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) Deputy Information Minister Daniil Bezsonov accused the Russian aerospace command of “tyranny” and “fraud.”[15] Russian sources claimed that Ukrainian forces struck rear Russian areas in Luhansk Oblast with British Storm Shadow cruise missiles on May 12 and 13, prompting heightened Russian anxiety about potential Ukrainian abilities to target Russian logistics. The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed on May 13 that Ukrainian aircraft struck industrial facilities in occupied Luhansk City with a Storm Shadow cruise missile on May 12.[16] Geolocated footage published on May 13 shows the aftermath of Ukrainian strikes on Yuvileyne (7km west of Luhansk City) on May 13, and Russian sources widely claimed that Ukrainian forces also used Storm Shadow cruise missiles in the subsequent strike.[17] A Russian milblogger claimed that a Storm Shadow cruise missile would have caused more damage, however, and the Luhansk People’s Republic (LNR) Internal Ministry claimed that Ukrainian forces used “Hrim-2” missiles to conduct the May 12 strike.[18] United Kingdom Defense Secretary Ben Wallace confirmed on May 12 that the UK is supplying Ukraine with the missiles but did not specify when or even if Ukraine received them.[19] ISW has not observed visual confirmation that Ukrainian forces have used Storm Shadow cruise missiles to strike Russian positions in Ukraine. Russian milbloggers claimed that the strike illustrates that Ukrainian forces may be able to target airfields and rear deployment and logistics centers in areas previously considered to be completely safe.[20] A prominent Russian milblogger compared the alleged use of the cruise missiles to the summer of 2022 when Ukrainian forces began using HIMARS rockets to target Russian logistics in Kherson Oblast and argued that the Russian information space is similarly attempting to downplay the impact that such systems may have.[21] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-may-13-2023Ukrainian forces continued counterattacking around Bakhmut on May 14. Ukrainian Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Malyar reported that Ukrainian forces captured over 10 Russian positions on the northern and southern outskirts of Bakhmut over the course of the day on May 14.[10] Russian milbloggers claimed that Ukrainian troops attacked towards Berkhivka, Klishchiivka, and Kurdiumivka and took up new unspecified positions near the settlements and additionally advanced towards Yahidne from the direction of Bohdanivka.[11] Wagner Group financier Yevgeny Prigozhin claimed that Ukrainian forces did not conduct any attacks on the night of May 13 to 14, however.[12] ISW has not observed visual confirmation of new Ukrainian positions around Bakhmut. Ukrainian Eastern Group of Forces Spokesperson Colonel Serhiy Cherevaty emphasized on May 14 that Ukraine’s main goal in Bakhmut is to destroy Russian concentration areas and encircle the city, not to conduct frontal assaults.[13] Cherevaty noted that Ukrainian forces have recently advanced up to 300m in some areas, and Malyar reported that Ukrainian forces are advancing in two directions in the suburbs of Bakhmut.[14] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-may-14-2023 |
|
|
|
Yeah Kari Lake just can't stop winning. In mid-February, the Arizona Court of Appeals rejected Lake’s assertions, concluding she presented no evidence that voters whose ballots were unreadable by tabulators at polling places were not able to vote.
The state Supreme Court declined on March 22 to hear nearly all of Lake’s appeal, saying there was no evidence to support her claim that over 35,000 ballots were added to vote totals. Earlier this month, the court sanctioned Lake’s lawyers $2,000 for making false statements when saying more than 35,000 ballots had been improperly added to the total ballot count. https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/kari-lake-election-challenge-proceed-arizona-officials-99294309I mean whining. |
|
|
|
There is crime, and there is other crime. What I mean is, A rich person getting rich is not necessarily a crime. It's only a crime if he is hurting someone else directly.
Actually getting rich is never a crime. There's no law against it. Trump was already rich before he started committing crimes anyway. ( his father gave him over $1m by the time he was 8!) Of course there have been plenty of crimes committed later in his life. He got his scam charity and scam university shut down. The Trump Org was found guilty by a jury in a criminal trial. His prsonal lawyer went to prison. His ceo is in jail now. He was just found liable for sexual abuse and defamation, he's got a criminal trial coming up in NY for a dozen or so felonies, and he'll probably be indicted in Georgia, DC and possibly Florida for many more felonies in the three other cases before the first criminal trial even begins. Here's a good summary, it's a bit outdated there's been more, but it's still worth a look over: The Complete Guide to All the Ways Donald Trump Is Legally ScrewedOh wait. This thread is about Biden....oops |
|
|
|
All bets beside the house edge are coinflips.
So if the house edge is 0,5%, 99,5% of your bets will be a coinflip, means you will win 49,75% and lose 49,75% of them.
That's wrong because you don't always win 1x your money in blackjack. When you are dealt a black jack you win 1.5x your bet. Even if the house edge were 0%, you would still lose more hands than you win because on average you win more than 1x your bet. At Black Jack the house edge is not determined by the percentage of hands you win and lose! Therefore any reference to hands to explain the house edge is nonsense! If your brain is not able to understand this, why do not you stop with your nonsense? Ok, change hands to bets then. If the house edge is 0.5% that means on average the casino expects to profit 50 cents for every $100 wagered. You wagered about $9.5 million, correct? Do you know how to calculate how much you should expect to lose after wagering $9.5 million at a game with a 0.5% house edge? Do you know how to calculate how much you should expect to lose after wagering $9.5 million at a game with a 0.5% house edge and 0,5% rewards received? Yes, I do. How much should a player expect to lose playing a game with a 0.5% house edge after wagering $9,500,000? It's a simple question, I'm honestly curious to see if you know how to calculate it. If you get stumped, I've explained how to do it already in this thread. |
|
|
|
You still haven't figured out that there are appeals processes. Such things as this aren't done until they are done.
Wouldn't be surprised if he decides not to appeal. Doesn't seem like he has much of a case plus he's already got one criminal trial coming up and will likely be indicted at least one more time, possibly two or three more times in the next 6 months or so...all an appeal would do is put the sexual abuse and defamation he's been held liable for back into a news cycle a year from now. He didn't even try to defend himself in court. Why is Trump so popular?
 The electors didn't realize that the figures they based their decisions on were lies. Some of them still haven't figured this out. Try a search on "Biden popularity figures" - https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=biden+popularity+figures&ia=web. Found this in your search results.  So Biden is as popular as Trump on his 840th day as president. Guess that's not a good sign considering Trump was not reelected. Try this search: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=the+big+lie&t=ffab&ia=web |
|
|
|
You still haven't figured out that there are appeals processes. Such things as this aren't done until they are done.
Wouldn't be surprised if he decides not to appeal. Doesn't seem like he has much of a case plus he's already got one criminal trial coming up and will likely be indicted at least one more time, possibly two or three more times in the next 6 months or so...all an appeal would do is put the sexual abuse and defamation he's been held liable for back into a news cycle a year from now. He didn't even try to defend himself in court. Why is Trump so popular?
|
|
|
|
Please do not ever give a casino a pass because they returned a deposit and only kept player winnings.
I will suggest you not give a pass to a player too when you do not know if he was manipulating you, hiding information from you. You have no way to verify anything except trusting him. In fact you and me have no way to verify anything presented by the sportsbook too. A pass for what? They agreed to use a third party to arbitrate. Ruling was in favor of player. Consider the facts and then reconsider your stance. Player: - Gives detailed explanation of situation. Provides evidence. - Gives site permission to share any evidence. - Offers to go to arbitration, gives permission to site to share all info with third party. - Result of arbitration in their favor. Casino: - Does not provide any details or even a specific accusation. - Agrees to arbitration, loses. - Still doesn't pay. - Ghosts forum. - Only been around for 6 months. - Obvious ties to the longest running scam casino on the forum that is well known for freerolling players by making vague accusations against winners, seizing their profit, returning only their deposit and then going silent.Why would you defend the casino? And yes, that is what you're doing. |
|
|
|
Most importantly if coinplay was really wanted to scam the OP then why did they returned his deposit?
You mean if they really wanted to steal players money why did they only steal some and not all of it? Because that's what scam casinos do. It's called a freeroll. ANd 1xbit is the best example of a site that does this on a regular basis. They keep all of their losing players deposits + some of their winning players winnings. Players are less likely to create a public issue if the deposit is returned, even though they never had a chance to win. I'm sure if it were more profitable, they wouldn't return player deposits, but it seems to be an effective strategy. Returning players deposits and confiscating their winnings should always be a red flag - there are very few cases where doing so is the appropriate decision for a casino. A players balance belongs to the player. It doesn't matter how much they deposited. Please do not ever give a casino a pass because they returned a deposit and only kept player winnings. Just a reminder to everyone that's trying to defend Coinplay for some odd reason:
Coinplay agreed to use askgamblers to arbitrate.
Askgamblers ruled against Coinplay.
Coinplay did not pay and ghosted.
There is absolutely no reason that Coinplay deserves any benefit of doubt in this situation.
I'm not defending Coinplay, in my eyes this ended up as a good lesson for both sides. Coinplay got slapped by the internet for not dealing with the issue, the player got their deposit back (regardless if they did or did not try to play the system) By even suggesting that a player having their balance taken minus their deposit is somehow acceptable or meaningful is, in fact, defending Coinplay. What I'm trying to do though is figure out for my self what actually happened here, and it seems there's more to it.
#1. We have a Dutch player, who shouldn't be playing outside of his country, actively playing on several brands outside of his country.
#2. That player won a larger amount through activity on several accounts, and triggered the abuser matrix.
#3. That same player got reported that he was playing with different accounts, arbitrage and so on.
#4. The operator didn't want to argue, refunded his deposit and closed his account.
#5. Even if the player could manage to somehow prove that he wasn't abusing the operator and remove all the smoke surrounding him, if KYC would be asked for, he would fail it and again only get the deposit back.
Your list should read: #1. Coinplay and player had a dispute of players balance. #2. Coinplay and player agree to use third party. #3. Third party rules against Coinplay. #4. Coinplay still doesn't pay player and ghosts the forum. |
|
|
|
Well...I thought I'd just check back in on the latest KRAKEN comments.
Ah yes indeed, more gems from my Buddy BADecker... why am I not surprised??... the gift that keeps on giving, lol.
Some people like you may prefer to see this whole situation from the comic point of view and take the best out of some seemingly absurd things like people on the internet say, while some shady politicians try (fruitlessly) to overturn an election. To me and to many others it is actually concerning that the American democracy just held up because the honest actions and values of a handful of people who refused to play along. Among them, perhaps the most famous is the secretary of State of Georgia. USA would be a completely place today if not for those public servants who refused to play along without evidence, and that is scary... I don't think seeing the comedy in BADeckers nonsense posts and realizing the gravity of the situation are mutually exclusive. I know they aren't actually. I'd probably give Pence the "I'm not going to be Trumps bitch and fuck America" prize over Raffensperger though. There were many though. Imagine if Trump tapped someone like Rudy for AG instead of Barr, or had Kari Lake instead Pence for his VP. Imagine if he never fired Flynn. If he wins in 2024 we won't have to imagine. He will learn from his mistakes. |
|
|
|
You are creating doubt in mind, I am sorry I removed my support from the flag you created.
You see coinplay agreed to use askgamblers to review the case, right? And askgamblers ruled against them. And then instead of paying the player they ghosted, right. The details of the case don't even matter anymore. In other words all sportsbook who have Curacao license are absolutely joke and the governing body who authorized Curacao license are jokes too? Let's not understand a thing the way it benefits us.
What? I never criticized any site for having a license from Curacao. There are plenty of trustworthy sites that do. But the only benefits of the license are for the casino. The fact that a casino has a license from Curacao should mean nothing from the players perspective as to whether or not they should trust the casino with their money. |
|
|
|
Is this what the kraken has been reduced to? Using google makes you vote Democrat? Feels like your heart isn't in it anymore BADecker.  |
|
|
|
Just a reminder to everyone that's trying to defend Coinplay for some odd reason: Coinplay agreed to use askgamblers to arbitrate. Askgamblers ruled against Coinplay. Coinplay did not pay and ghosted. There is absolutely no reason that Coinplay deserves any benefit of doubt in this situation. Antillephone is a horrible Licenseholder and does nothing to protect players from dishonest companies.
I know you're angry about the whole situation, but you can't just throw around sentences like this. Every Curacao license holder will stop dealing with an operator that has constant issues with players, and Antillephone is not an exception. I also see that your default location is in Netherlands, were you KYC verified and are your documents german or dutch? Curacao itself is a joke when it comes to gaming licenses and judging by the email he got, Antillephone is as well. I know, big changes are supposedly in the works, but the only memorable action I've ever seen Curacao take is to defend 1xbit, the longest running scam casino, after they were forced into bankruptcy, and attack the one who investigated them. I don't think it's a coincidence that Coinplay is very likely a 1xbit franchise. |
|
|
|
All bets beside the house edge are coinflips.
So if the house edge is 0,5%, 99,5% of your bets will be a coinflip, means you will win 49,75% and lose 49,75% of them.
That's wrong because you don't always win 1x your money in blackjack. When you are dealt a black jack you win 1.5x your bet. Even if the house edge were 0%, you would still lose more hands than you win because on average you win more than 1x your bet. At Black Jack the house edge is not determined by the percentage of hands you win and lose! Therefore any reference to hands to explain the house edge is nonsense! If your brain is not able to understand this, why do not you stop with your nonsense? Ok, change hands to bets then. If the house edge is 0.5% that means on average the casino expects to profit 50 cents for every $100 wagered. You wagered about $9.5 million, correct? Do you know how to calculate how much you should expect to lose after wagering $9.5 million at a game with a 0.5% house edge? |
|
|
|
All bets beside the house edge are coinflips.
So if the house edge is 0,5%, 99,5% of your bets will be a coinflip, means you will win 49,75% and lose 49,75% of them.
That's wrong because you don't always win 1x your money in blackjack. When you are dealt a black jack you win 1.5x your bet. Even if the house edge were 0%, you would still lose more hands than you win because on average you win more than 1x your bet. I don't know how to make it any more clear. Why not just do a little bit of research or ask anyone that understands blackjack and has some very basic education since you obviously don't believe me. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
