[Beware] TwitchySeal: Abuses his Rep, replies to his own posts with alts, etc

[cjmoles]

Known multi-accounter, liar, DDOS'er, shill, and troll.  Absolutely avoid playing in any poker rooms this player frequents.  Also known to lose all his money on the tables then return to make baseless accusations.  Affiliates and vouches for an advertised thief:  

I'd trust a "known" liar with EVIDENCE then a paid shill that advertises a company known to change the TOS without changing the time stamps, steal rakes, and didn't want to pay out the FULL value of the jackpot(instead of forcing the winner into a settlement for less money then he won), but that's just me.

See....You're listening to twitchy.  jasonort didn't win the jackpot like twitchy claims.  The jackpot could only be won on a spin that contributed to the jackpot but jasonort hit his combination on a "freespin" which doesn't contribute to the jackpot.  However, Betsoft gave jasonort something anyway because of the confusion, but the terms clearly stated that only a "maxbet spin" qualifies for the jackpot...the added language was subsequently put in place to add clarification to the rules to avoid future misinterpretations.  And, that clarification was added only AFTER jasonort's claim had been recorded, not before....Betsoft didn't actually have to give jasonort anything because "maxbet spin" does not equal "freespin," as only  a "maxbet spin" adds to the prize pool and a "freespin"does not.   Twitchyseal manipulated the information to swing public opinion in a direction that conformed to his own agenda and, I might add, into a direction that could jeopardize jasonort's settlement, which is wrong again.  I will always be on the player's side, but what twitchy is doing goes against honest players because misinformation hurts the industry.

[1714832975]

1714832975

[1714832975]

1714832975

[thesame12]

Known multi-accounter, liar, DDOS'er, shill, and troll.  Absolutely avoid playing in any poker rooms this player frequents.  Also known to lose all his money on the tables then return to make baseless accusations.  Affiliates and vouches for an advertised thief:  

I'd trust a "known" liar with EVIDENCE then a paid shill that advertises a company known to change the TOS without changing the time stamps, steal rakes, and didn't want to pay out the FULL value of the jackpot(instead of forcing the winner into a settlement for less money then he won), but that's just me.

See....You're listening to twitchy.  jasonort didn't win the jackpot like twitchy claims.  The jackpot could only be won on a spin that contributed to the jackpot but jasonort hit his combination on a "freespin" which doesn't contribute to the jackpot.  However, Betsoft gave jasonort something anyway because of the confusion, but the terms clearly stated that only a "maxbet spin" qualifies for the jackpot...the added language was subsequently put in place to add clarification to the rules to avoid future misinterpretations.  And, that clarification was added only AFTER jasonort's claim had been recorded, not before....Betsoft didn't actually have to give jasonort anything because "maxbet spin" does not equal "freespin," as only  a "maxbet spin" adds to the prize pool and a "freespin"does not.   Twitchyseal manipulated the information to swing public opinion in a direction that conformed to his own agenda and, I might add, into a direction that could jeopardize jasonort's settlement, which is wrong again.  I will always be on the player's side, but what twitchy is doing goes against honest players because misinformation hurts the industry.

And where did the rules say that freespins don't contribute to the jackpot? The only rule pertaining to that jackpot was "5 yachts icons on max bet wins jackpot." nothing about freespins. Also, want to address the other concerns as well?

[cjmoles]

Known multi-accounter, liar, DDOS'er, shill, and troll.  Absolutely avoid playing in any poker rooms this player frequents.  Also known to lose all his money on the tables then return to make baseless accusations.  Affiliates and vouches for an advertised thief:  

I'd trust a "known" liar with EVIDENCE then a paid shill that advertises a company known to change the TOS without changing the time stamps, steal rakes, and didn't want to pay out the FULL value of the jackpot(instead of forcing the winner into a settlement for less money then he won), but that's just me.

See....You're listening to twitchy.  jasonort didn't win the jackpot like twitchy claims.  The jackpot could only be won on a spin that contributed to the jackpot but jasonort hit his combination on a "freespin" which doesn't contribute to the jackpot.  However, Betsoft gave jasonort something anyway because of the confusion, but the terms clearly stated that only a "maxbet spin" qualifies for the jackpot...the added language was subsequently put in place to add clarification to the rules to avoid future misinterpretations.  And, that clarification was added only AFTER jasonort's claim had been recorded, not before....Betsoft didn't actually have to give jasonort anything because "maxbet spin" does not equal "freespin," as only  a "maxbet spin" adds to the prize pool and a "freespin"does not.   Twitchyseal manipulated the information to swing public opinion in a direction that conformed to his own agenda and, I might add, into a direction that could jeopardize jasonort's settlement, which is wrong again.  I will always be on the player's side, but what twitchy is doing goes against honest players because misinformation hurts the industry.

And where did the rules say that freespins don't contribute to the jackpot? The only rule pertaining to that jackpot was "5 yachts icons on max bet wins jackpot." nothing about freespins. Also, want to address the other concerns as well?

Here: "5 yachts icons on max bet wins jackpot."  "Free spin" does not translate to "max bet spin" under common translation. "Free bet" does not equal "maximum bet" if translated under common usage rules.  However, jasonort did have an extended argument but I don't think it would have held because the intent of the jackpot was coded into the programming of the software. Now, if the jackpot had fallen and they didn't pay under the same logic, then there would have been a strong case in jasonort's favor.  The jackpot didn't fall so that demonstrates that "max bet spin" was never meant to be interpreted as"free spin."  There are all kinds of other "legal" reasons why spins are classified into those that contribute to the jackpot and those that do not contribute jackpot, related to tax law, which goes into quite a bit more detail, but the truth of the matter is that this event was not as black and white as the shills would portray it to be.

Question: "And where did the rules say that freespins don't contribute to the jackpot?" Answer:  The way the progressive jackpot is built is that for every maximum size bet, a percentage of that wager is contributed to the jackpot; however, a "free spin" is a free bet. Therefore, it's a zero wagered spin, and any contributing percentage of a zero wagered spin contributes nothing to the jackpot.  It doesn't need to be stated because it is inherently included in the definitions of the terms "free" and "max."

Mathematical Example (Hyperbole):  Say you bought a ticket from a lottery provider for a 100 bucks so the prize pool becomes 100 bucks.  Now, say that same lottery provider gave a million other tickets, to that same lottery, away for free.  The prize pool is still 100 bucks, but now your chance of winning are a million to one....would that be fair?  The same logic applies to the "freespins" scenario above.  It wouldn't be fair to the progressive jackpot player pool base if non contributing wagers were included in the event because they would change the probability of that event in a negative manner.

EDIT:

The other concerns that twichy refers to have all been resolved and the players have been compensated long ago in various manners....but twitchy keeps misrepresenting those facts by bringing them up as unresolved matters.  The funny thing is that the players who play at Betcoin.ag are satisfied with the resolutions, even jasonort....the only people who are not satisfied are those who own, endorse, or shill for other casinos.  WHY?  because Betcoin.ag is a quickly growing brand which is cornering the bitcoin market and the competitors want to stop them so that they might increase their own revenue.

[thesame12]

even jasonort

Then, what's this about?

[cjmoles]

even jasonort

Then, what's this about?

That's about a post he posted on the Betcoin.ag thread which he requested not be politicized on this forum.  You can find the post there....Somehow the content of that post was snipped and brought here to be politicized against jasonort's wishes, which unlike TwitchySeal, we should all respect.

[actmyname]

even jasonort

Then, what's this about?

That's about a post he posted on the Betcoin.ag thread which he requested not be politicized on this forum.  You can find the post there....Somehow the content of that post was snipped and brought here to be politicized against jasonort's wishes, which unlike TwitchySeal, we should all respect.

You mean to say that

Betcoin.ag has just erased my entire post on their forums.  I gave them every opportunity to explain their side of this.  I did not throw them under the bus.  I was civil.  And now they erase my post and just expect me to disappear?  Game on.

has no relevance whatsoever and you're completely ignoring that? Don't focus on Twitchy's post. Focus on jasonort's post.

[cjmoles]

even jasonort

Then, what's this about?

That's about a post he posted on the Betcoin.ag thread which he requested not be politicized on this forum.  You can find the post there....Somehow the content of that post was snipped and brought here to be politicized against jasonort's wishes, which unlike TwitchySeal, we should all respect.

You mean to say that

Betcoin.ag has just erased my entire post on their forums.  I gave them every opportunity to explain their side of this.  I did not throw them under the bus.  I was civil.  And now they erase my post and just expect me to disappear?  Game on.

has no relevance whatsoever and you're completely ignoring that? Don't focus on Twitchy's post. Focus on jasonort's post.

They put it back up....they removed it because it was being used to politicize the settlement against jasonort's wishes but they put it back up after his dissatisfaction....They were actually trying to protect jasonort's interests there.  And, I am not ignoring it; I follow all the developments very closely; if you follow the thread of that citation you'll see that I provide my input there also....as far as focusing on Twitchy, I'm trying to stay on topic here.  TwitchySeal, took information that jasonort didn't want to be exposed on this thread and he twisted the facts to meet his agenda....that's all.

[TwitchySeal]

even jasonort

Then, what's this about?

That's about a post he posted on the Betcoin.ag thread which he requested not be politicized on this forum.  You can find the post there....Somehow the content of that post was snipped and brought here to be politicized against jasonort's wishes, which unlike TwitchySeal, we should all respect.

You mean to say that

Betcoin.ag has just erased my entire post on their forums.  I gave them every opportunity to explain their side of this.  I did not throw them under the bus.  I was civil.  And now they erase my post and just expect me to disappear?  Game on.

has no relevance whatsoever and you're completely ignoring that? Don't focus on Twitchy's post. Focus on jasonort's post.

They put it back up....they removed it because it was being used to politicize the settlement against jasonort's wishes but they put it back up after his dissatisfaction....They were actually trying to protect jasonort's interests there.  And, I am not ignoring it; I follow all the developments very closely; if you follow the thread of that citation you'll see that I provide my input there also....as far as focusing on Twitchy, I'm trying to stay on topic here.  TwitchySeal, took information that jasonort didn't want to be exposed on this thread and he twisted the facts to meet his agenda....that's all.

They put it back up after several players complained.  They locked the thread so it would not be seen on "recent activity" if players wanted to discuss it.

I shared the information with jasons permission almost two weeks after jason created the thread.

cjmoles, you're a scumbag liar. 

[TwitchySeal]

Known multi-accounter, liar, DDOS'er, shill, and troll.  Absolutely avoid playing in any poker rooms this player frequents.  Also known to lose all his money on the tables then return to make baseless accusations.  Affiliates and vouches for an advertised thief:  

Please provide evidence of me multi-accounting on any site other than to use the forum/chat on Betcoin.

Please provide evidence of me lying about anything.

Please provide evidence of me shilling.

Ok, I've trolled.  

Losing all my money?  wtf are you talking about?

Affiliate and vouches for who?  I'm not an affiliate for any site.  

Why are you doing this cjmoles?  Just be honest.  I will respond to any accusation or question reasonably.

[TwitchySeal]

Question: "And where did the rules say that freespins don't contribute to the jackpot?" Answer:  The way the progressive jackpot is built is that for every maximum size bet, a percentage of that wager is contributed to the jackpot; however, a "free spin" is a free bet. Therefore, it's a zero wagered spin, and any contributing percentage of a zero wagered spin contributes nothing to the jackpot.  It doesn't need to be stated because it is inherently included in the definitions of the terms "free" and "max."

Mathematical Example (Hyperbole):  Say you bought a ticket from a lottery provider for a 100 bucks so the prize pool becomes 100 bucks.  Now, say that same lottery provider gave a million other tickets, to that same lottery, away for free.  The prize pool is still 100 bucks, but now your chance of winning are a million to one....would that be fair?  The same logic applies to the "freespins" scenario above.  It wouldn't be fair to the progressive jackpot player pool base if non contributing wagers were included in the event because they would change the probability of that event in a negative manner.

In greedygoblins, a betsoft progressive slot, it's implied that the jackpot can be won, but not multiplied during freespins.  If the jackpot could not be won, it would say "Note: Jackpot can not be won during freespins".  Instead it says "Note: Jackpot can not be multiplied".

There are plenty of progressive jackpots that can be won during freespins in games from other providers.  It's ridiculous to assume "it's a freespin so jackpots can not be won" is something players should just "know".  The freespins aren't even technically "free" .  You can't win them without wagering.

[cjmoles]

Question: "And where did the rules say that freespins don't contribute to the jackpot?" Answer:  The way the progressive jackpot is built is that for every maximum size bet, a percentage of that wager is contributed to the jackpot; however, a "free spin" is a free bet. Therefore, it's a zero wagered spin, and any contributing percentage of a zero wagered spin contributes nothing to the jackpot.  It doesn't need to be stated because it is inherently included in the definitions of the terms "free" and "max."

Mathematical Example (Hyperbole):  Say you bought a ticket from a lottery provider for a 100 bucks so the prize pool becomes 100 bucks.  Now, say that same lottery provider gave a million other tickets, to that same lottery, away for free.  The prize pool is still 100 bucks, but now your chance of winning are a million to one....would that be fair?  The same logic applies to the "freespins" scenario above.  It wouldn't be fair to the progressive jackpot player pool base if non contributing wagers were included in the event because they would change the probability of that event in a negative manner.

In greedygoblins, a betsoft progressive slot, it's implied that the jackpot can be won, but not multiplied during freespins.  If the jackpot could not be won, it would say "Note: Jackpot can not be won during freespins".  Instead it says "Note: Jackpot can not be multiplied".

There are plenty of progressive jackpots that can be won during freespins in games from other providers.  It's ridiculous to assume "it's a freespin so jackpots can not be won" is something players should just "know".  The freespins aren't even technically "free" .  You can't win them without wagering.

It doesn't say that a jackpot can't be won if you don't play either, but you can assume that you can't win the jackpot if you don't play.  The point is that if the jackpot was designed to be won on a freespin, then the jackpot would have dropped on the freespin, but it was not even coded into the software so it didn't drop.

And the references about multiplying the jackpot has nothing to do with freespins....it has to do with in-game multipliers and gambling features.  Nevertheless, "max bet spin" does not equal "freespin."  There have been cases involving IGT that

It doesn't say that a jackpot can't be won if you don't play either, but you can assume that you can't win the jackpot if you don't play.  The point is that if the jackpot was designed to be won on a freespin, then the jackpot would have dropped on the freespin, but it was not even coded into the software so it couldn't have dropped.  If it would have dropped and they didn't pay based on their interpretation then that would have been a problem....there's case law on just that point.

And the references about multiplying the jackpot has nothing to do with freespins....it has to do with in-game multipliers and gambling features.  Nevertheless, "max bet spin" does not equal "freespin."  There have been cases involving IGT and the brick and morter casinos that subscribe to their services that have examined these issues.

Now, I'm not saying that jasonort didn't have an argument with his interpretation of the rules because he did, but then again, he did get something for the confusion....but he would have lost in court because the software was not designed to pay on a freespin, whether that was stated or not...."free" and "max" have completely opposite definitions, and any educated jury would have to agree to that fact.

[cjmoles]

Known multi-accounter, liar, DDOS'er, shill, and troll.  Absolutely avoid playing in any poker rooms this player frequents.  Also known to lose all his money on the tables then return to make baseless accusations.  Affiliates and vouches for an advertised thief:  

Please provide evidence of me multi-accounting on any site other than to use the forum/chat on Betcoin.  Betcoin.ag

Please provide evidence of me lying about anything. Not only have you photo shopped misinformation over a screen shot that I personally posted, but you've also said that betcoin.ag pays me to bash on you....LOL....those are lies!

Please provide evidence of me shilling.  Just look at your posts about about needing more traffic in the SwC thread.

Ok, I've trolled.  

Losing all my money?  wtf are you talking about?  This whole thing started after you had a bad week during the Million Dollar Sunday and wanted to know why you didn't receive as many comps as you thought you deserved for the WPN tourneys that you blew your wad in!

Affiliate and vouches for who?  I'm not an affiliate for any site.  You affiliate yourself with game-protect and endorse him by giving him positive trust.....look at the reference above.

Why are you doing this cjmoles?  Just be honest.  I will respond to any accusation or question reasonably.  Twitchy.....you are not reasonable and I am honest.  You should evaluate your own honesty and sense of fairness here.

Note:  Red Font in the quote above added by me for brevity.

This is really my perception of you Twitchy, I'm sorry.

[TwitchySeal]

It doesn't say that a jackpot can't be won if you don't play either, but you can assume that you can't win the jackpot if you don't play. 

I agree, you should assume you can't win the progressive jackpot on any machine without playing.

The point is that if the jackpot was designed to be won on a freespin, then the jackpot would have dropped on the freespin, but it was not even coded into the software so it couldn't have dropped.  If it would have dropped and they didn't pay based on their interpretation then that would have been a problem....there's case law on just that point.

The point is, all evidence points to the fact that this jackpot can not be won and Betcoin knows it. 

And the references about multiplying the jackpot has nothing to do with freespins...

What makes you think so?

[cjmoles]

It doesn't say that a jackpot can't be won if you don't play either, but you can assume that you can't win the jackpot if you don't play.

I agree, you should assume you can't win the progressive jackpot on any machine without playing.

The point is that if the jackpot was designed to be won on a freespin, then the jackpot would have dropped on the freespin, but it was not even coded into the software so it couldn't have dropped.  If it would have dropped and they didn't pay based on their interpretation then that would have been a problem....there's case law on just that point.

The point is, all evidence points to the fact that this jackpot can not be won and Betcoin knows it.  

And the references about multiplying the jackpot has nothing to do with freespins...

What makes you think so?

It states that "jackpot cannot be multiplied."  Note that there are in game multipliers and a 2X's gambling feature.  Also note that it is set off in red font to differentiate it from the above paragraph.  And, then ask yourself, "Does 'jackpot cannot be multiplied' state that the jackpot can be won during freespins or is that something that I am fabricating up based on assumption?"  Also note that if the jackpot cannot be won during the feature then it also cannot be multiplied by the feature....

See, it takes great leaps in logic to reach your conclusions.  And, it is untruth to say that Betsoft progressives cannot be won....Betsoft progressives have been won on numerous occasions.

EDIT: Having said the above, I might add that the game illustrated above is not even the same game jasonort played....This is just another misinformation tactic, like the photo shopped images, constant trolling, multiple account generation, shill recruiting, and the various other misinformation techniques practiced by your group.

[TwitchySeal]

Red=cjmoles
Bold = my response to red

Please provide evidence of me multi-accounting on any site other than to use the forum/chat on Betcoin.  Betcoin.ag

Multi-accounting infers something much more serious than creating an account to post on a forum or chat.  We both know that.  You are trying to make me out to be a cheater. I'm not.

Please provide evidence of me lying about anything. Not only have you photo shopped misinformation over a screen shot that I personally posted, but you've also said that betcoin.ag pays me to bash on you....LOL....those are lies!
We both know when I added "lutpin must die" over and over again to your screen shot of you researching lutpin after you went off on him was not taken seriously by anyone.  It was a joke at your expense.  Like the "Twitchy is a multi-accounter" thing, you're just twitsting reality to make me look bad

Please provide evidence of me shilling.  Just look at your posts about about needing more traffic in the SwC thread.

What post or posts are you talking about?  Do you consider yourself a shill?  What is your definition of shill?

Losing all my money?  wtf are you talking about?  This whole thing started after you had a bad week during the Million Dollar Sunday and wanted to know why you didn't receive as many comps as you thought you deserved for the WPN tourneys that you blew your wad in!

You really think it makes sense to conclude that since I didn't cash in a $500 mtt I must have "blew my wad"?  I've been a professional poker player for nearly three years now.  If I were anywhere near broke I wouldn't be firing multiple bullets into $500 online tourneys.

Affiliate and vouches for who?  I'm not an affiliate for any site.  You affiliate yourself with game-protect and endorse him by giving him positive trust.....look at the reference above.

I do not affiliate myself with Games-Direct.  I left him positive trust for sharing information that helps hold sites accountable.  It has nothing to do with his site, which I have never recommended anyone use.

[TwitchySeal]

It doesn't say that a jackpot can't be won if you don't play either, but you can assume that you can't win the jackpot if you don't play. 

I agree, you should assume you can't win the progressive jackpot on any machine without playing.

The point is that if the jackpot was designed to be won on a freespin, then the jackpot would have dropped on the freespin, but it was not even coded into the software so it couldn't have dropped.  If it would have dropped and they didn't pay based on their interpretation then that would have been a problem....there's case law on just that point.

The point is, all evidence points to the fact that this jackpot can not be won and Betcoin knows it. 

And the references about multiplying the jackpot has nothing to do with freespins...

What makes you think so?

It states that "jackpot cannot be multiplied."  Note that there are in game multipliers and a 2X's gambling feature.  Also note that it is set off in red font to differentiate it from the above paragraph.  And, then ask yourself, "Does 'jackpot cannot be multiplied' state that the jackpot can be won during freespins or is that something that I am fabricating up based on assumption?"  Also note that if the jackpot cannot be won during the feature then it also cannot be multiplied by the feature....

See, it takes great leaps in logic to reach your conclusions.  And, it is untruth to say that Betsoft progressives cannot be won....Betsoft progressives have been won on numerous occasions.

The red comment is obviously referring to the freespins.  I'm having a hard time believing even you believe the ridiculous argument your making.

I never said "Betsoft Progressives cannot be won.
I said that jackpot can not be won.

It takes no leap in logic to reach my conclusion.  All it takes is a bit of common sense.  If the jackpot couldn't be won during free spins, it wouldn't say what it says.

[cjmoles]

It doesn't say that a jackpot can't be won if you don't play either, but you can assume that you can't win the jackpot if you don't play.

I agree, you should assume you can't win the progressive jackpot on any machine without playing.

The point is that if the jackpot was designed to be won on a freespin, then the jackpot would have dropped on the freespin, but it was not even coded into the software so it couldn't have dropped.  If it would have dropped and they didn't pay based on their interpretation then that would have been a problem....there's case law on just that point.

The point is, all evidence points to the fact that this jackpot can not be won and Betcoin knows it.  

And the references about multiplying the jackpot has nothing to do with freespins...

What makes you think so?

It states that "jackpot cannot be multiplied."  Note that there are in game multipliers and a 2X's gambling feature.  Also note that it is set off in red font to differentiate it from the above paragraph.  And, then ask yourself, "Does 'jackpot cannot be multiplied' state that the jackpot can be won during freespins or is that something that I am fabricating up based on assumption?"  Also note that if the jackpot cannot be won during the feature then it also cannot be multiplied by the feature....

See, it takes great leaps in logic to reach your conclusions.  And, it is untruth to say that Betsoft progressives cannot be won....Betsoft progressives have been won on numerous occasions.

EDIT: Having said the above, I might add that the game illustrated above is not even the same game jasonort played....This is just another misinformation tactic, like the photo shopped images, constant trolling, multiple account generation, shill recruiting, and the various other misinformation techniques practiced by your group.

The red comment is obviously referring to the freespins.  I'm having a hard time believing even you believe the ridiculous argument your making.

I never said "Betsoft Progressives cannot be won.
I said that jackpot can not be won.

It takes no leap in logic to reach my conclusion.  All it takes is a bit of common sense.  If the jackpot couldn't be won during free spins, it wouldn't say what it says.

There have been numerous Betsoft Progressive Jackpots won and it is an untruth to say that they haven't been won.  And, there is no way Betsoft could've gotten into their software and changed the coding to reverse the Progressive Jackpot from falling after the combination was hit on a freespin if freespins qualified for the jackpot.  It didn't fall so obviously it wasn't coded to fall.  So, as demonstrated in the code "free" was never intended to be synonymous with "max," even if we ignored the standard definitions of the two terms.  If I only said, "I'm charging the maximum amount for this car" that doesn't mean that I have to give the car away for free because I DIDN'T specifically say maximum amount doesn't equal free amount.  max bet != freebet under any common usage tests, no matter how it's manipulated.

And, a shill is somebody who tries to manipulate people, deceptively, to guide them to gamble with whom the shill holds an interest.

[thesame12]

CJ; what about the fact that betcoin was caught changing the TOS without notifying the players and changing the time stamp? Want to answer that?

[cjmoles]

CJ; what about the fact that betcoin was caught changing the TOS without notifying the players and changing the time stamp? Want to answer that?

Jasonort's complaint had already been recorded and was being negotiated. He was claiming that he should'v won the jackpot because it wasn't stated that "free spin" did not equal "maximum bet spin" as an extension of a bonus round.  Betsoft clarified the rules to avoid further misinterpretations in the future and Betcoin had to amend the terms on their site because they are using the Betsoft software who wrote the code and pays the jackpot.  It would have been irresponsible not to clarify the terms....If the jackpot cannot be won on a "free spin," then it is only right to specify that point for the players who don't realize it.  In fact, it would have been wrong if they didn't clarify the rules after the conflict had been presented.  If the rules were not clarified, then people who don't understand the difference between "free" and "maximum" would still think that "free spins" qualify under the only "max bet wager" qualifies rule, by extension, when they actually don't.  All of it is coded into the software....if "free spins" did qualify as a maximum bet, then the jackpot would've dropped because it would've been coded into the software....but it wasn't coded into the software because free spins don't qualify, so the jackpot didn't drop. The rules were clarified to avoid future misinterpretations.  And, whoever said Betcoin changed the timestamp is lying because the opposite was true....they completely overlooked the timestamp.

Free spins don't qualify as a maxim bet wager and they never qualified as a maximum bet wager.  The rules were not changed; they were clarified for those who didn't understand them which was the right thing to do, not the wrong thing to do. 

Do you also believe that the rules were clear enough to avoid clarifying that point?  Should they have left them the way they were or does it help to have them clarified?

[cjmoles]

It doesn't say that a jackpot can't be won if you don't play either, but you can assume that you can't win the jackpot if you don't play.

I agree, you should assume you can't win the progressive jackpot on any machine without playing.

The point is that if the jackpot was designed to be won on a freespin, then the jackpot would have dropped on the freespin, but it was not even coded into the software so it couldn't have dropped.  If it would have dropped and they didn't pay based on their interpretation then that would have been a problem....there's case law on just that point.

The point is, all evidence points to the fact that this jackpot can not be won and Betcoin knows it.  

And the references about multiplying the jackpot has nothing to do with freespins...

What makes you think so?

It states that "jackpot cannot be multiplied."  Note that there are in game multipliers and a 2X's gambling feature.  Also note that it is set off in red font to differentiate it from the above paragraph.  And, then ask yourself, "Does 'jackpot cannot be multiplied' state that the jackpot can be won during freespins or is that something that I am fabricating up based on assumption?"  Also note that if the jackpot cannot be won during the feature then it also cannot be multiplied by the feature....

See, it takes great leaps in logic to reach your conclusions.  And, it is untruth to say that Betsoft progressives cannot be won....Betsoft progressives have been won on numerous occasions.

EDIT: Having said the above, I might add that the game illustrated above is not even the same game jasonort played....This is just another misinformation tactic, like the photo shopped images, constant trolling, multiple account generation, shill recruiting, and the various other misinformation techniques practiced by your group.

The red comment is obviously referring to the freespins.  I'm having a hard time believing even you believe the ridiculous argument your making.

I never said "Betsoft Progressives cannot be won.
I said that jackpot can not be won.

It takes no leap in logic to reach my conclusion.  All it takes is a bit of common sense.  If the jackpot couldn't be won during free spins, it wouldn't say what it says.

1)  "Greedy Goblins" is not the game in question as you are claiming; the game in question is called, "The Glam Life."

2)  You are right....the jackpot cannot be won on "The Glam Life" during free spins because free spins do not qualify as max bet wagers as stated in the game's rules and coded into the software.

3)  Jumping from the rules as stated in one game, re-interpreting them to fit your argument, and then applying that interpretation to a totally different game with a different set of conditions IS a great leap in logic.