CHIPS.GG banned without detailed explanation (SOLVED, DEPOSITS RETURNED)

[r00t3rs]

But CG doesn't deal with sportsbook?

Ohh... you're right. An oversight from my side. LOL. On that case, chipsgg, are you on other ADR platform that facilitate a sports-related dispute? I can't see you on AG, so I believe there goes the two [IMO] best ADR option. Or perhaps you have other suggestion on how should OP proceed to get this [as well as you can clear it beyond doubt] back in motion?

I'm ok with chips sharing my betting history here, I honestly don't think I was arbing, I was only backing a single team, if that ain't allowed then no player should be allowed to bet multiple times. You bet once and it's over.

And as for cross-platforms, I backed the same team on other platforms as well, If Chips can mention what platforms they're interested in. I'm happy to share bets results from there and where they paid me without question.

[r00t3rs]

Why won't chipsgg reply now? Waiting patiently.

[holydarkness]

Why won't chipsgg reply now? Waiting patiently.

I have to run now, so I don't have much time, but when I have more time later today, let me try to compose a PM inquiring them an alternative means of resolution they can propose to get this situation resolved.

[r00t3rs]

Why won't chipsgg reply now? Waiting patiently.

I have to run now, so I don't have much time, but when I have more time later today, let me try to compose a PM inquiring them an alternative means of resolution they can propose to get this situation resolved.

Thanks man, appreciate it.

[r00t3rs]

Don't think Chips has any intentions of paying, stopped replying at all places.

[holydarkness]

Don't think Chips has any intentions of paying, stopped replying at all places.

I've sent them a PM on 19th, inquiring as what I said above. I am not sure whether they've been online ever since or just today, but I can see them online about one hour ago at the latest. Let's wait if they'll reply to my PM or not, and if they don't, to be sure that it's not simply because they missed my PM instead of deliberately ignoring it, I'll send them another PM tomorrow.

[r00t3rs]

Don't think Chips has any intentions of paying, stopped replying at all places.

I've sent them a PM on 19th, inquiring as what I said above. I am not sure whether they've been online ever since or just today, but I can see them online about one hour ago at the latest. Let's wait if they'll reply to my PM or not, and if they don't, to be sure that it's not simply because they missed my PM instead of deliberately ignoring it, I'll send them another PM tomorrow.

You're a nice guy still trying to mediate but I don't think Chips has it in them to pay. I have heard more rumblings on various Telegram groups about their scams.

Seems like it's a general trend to just mute people on group chat and their telegram group if somebody asks for what they owe.

I wish I could create more awareness about them by making noise in a bigger way, that's all.

[memehunter]

Open a flag against them if they do not reply within the next 24 hours. I will support it. 

[r00t3rs]

Open a flag against them if they do not reply within the next 24 hours. I will support it. 

I'm willing to do it. Just need some guidance on what to do etc..

[memehunter]

Open a flag against them if they do not reply within the next 24 hours. I will support it. 

I'm willing to do it. Just need some guidance on what to do etc..

Here is the information on flag: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5160255.0

Just to add, I have also left a negative trust until this case is resolved with proper sound evidences (not lame pathetic excuses). 

[r00t3rs]

Open a flag against them if they do not reply within the next 24 hours. I will support it. 

I'm willing to do it. Just need some guidance on what to do etc..

Here is the information on flag: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5160255.0

Just to add, I have also left a negative trust until this case is resolved with proper sound evidences (not lame pathetic excuses). 

I have also added now, thanks.

It just pisses me off that he doesn't give any evidence and shoots absolute lame stuff in the dark and expects me to agree on them

[holydarkness]

Don't think Chips has any intentions of paying, stopped replying at all places.

I've sent them a PM on 19th, inquiring as what I said above. I am not sure whether they've been online ever since or just today, but I can see them online about one hour ago at the latest. Let's wait if they'll reply to my PM or not, and if they don't, to be sure that it's not simply because they missed my PM instead of deliberately ignoring it, I'll send them another PM tomorrow.

You're a nice guy still trying to mediate but I don't think Chips has it in them to pay. I have heard more rumblings on various Telegram groups about their scams.

Seems like it's a general trend to just mute people on group chat and their telegram group if somebody asks for what they owe.

I wish I could create more awareness about them by making noise in a bigger way, that's all.

They replied to me earlier today, unfortunately, to summarize, it's basically a "we don't have anything further to add". I'm not sure they completely understand that I inquired for an ADR that they can suggest to facilitate a mediation, as their response to that topic was basically you've reached to an ADR and they'll respond to the --to quote-- "license authorities" when an inquiry was made to them.

I have also added now, thanks.

It just pisses me off that he doesn't give any evidence and shoots absolute lame stuff in the dark and expects me to agree on them

Uhh... not sure if you read the guide thoroughly or not, but a flag doesn't work as "easy" as a negative feedback, it'll need DT supports to be active. No matter how many non-DT members supporting or opposing it, the flag can only be active/inactive with DT's vote. At this time, your flag is inactive due to the insufficient support.

You're raising a type-1 flag, which will require at least one DT support before the banner can be shown to newbie and guests on each and every thread made by chips.

You can ask for support on this thread, provide the link to your flag.

[chipsgg]

Don't think Chips has any intentions of paying, stopped replying at all places.

I've sent them a PM on 19th, inquiring as what I said above. I am not sure whether they've been online ever since or just today, but I can see them online about one hour ago at the latest. Let's wait if they'll reply to my PM or not, and if they don't, to be sure that it's not simply because they missed my PM instead of deliberately ignoring it, I'll send them another PM tomorrow.

You're a nice guy still trying to mediate but I don't think Chips has it in them to pay. I have heard more rumblings on various Telegram groups about their scams.

Seems like it's a general trend to just mute people on group chat and their telegram group if somebody asks for what they owe.

I wish I could create more awareness about them by making noise in a bigger way, that's all.

They replied to me earlier today, unfortunately, to summarize, it's basically a "we don't have anything further to add". I'm not sure they completely understand that I inquired for an ADR that they can suggest to facilitate a mediation, as their response to that topic was basically you've reached to an ADR and they'll respond to the --to quote-- "license authorities" when an inquiry was made to them.

I have also added now, thanks.

It just pisses me off that he doesn't give any evidence and shoots absolute lame stuff in the dark and expects me to agree on them

Uhh... not sure if you read the guide thoroughly or not, but a flag doesn't work as "easy" as a negative feedback, it'll need DT supports to be active. No matter how many non-DT members supporting or opposing it, the flag can only be active/inactive with DT's vote. At this time, your flag is inactive due to the insufficient support.

You're raising a type-1 flag, which will require at least one DT support before the banner can be shown to newbie and guests on each and every thread made by chips.

You can ask for support on this thread, provide the link to your flag.

We do not appreciate you encouraging players to leave negative feedback about chips and other casinos without any clear evidence of the the casino's wrongdoing or the player's innocence.

We have provided our stance on this case including supporting evidence and references. Our decision was made in lockstep with our bookmaker reporting and company policies respectively.

Many casinos here have numerous threads made about them, however these are not clear indication that they have done anything wrong. The player is free to report his case to the license and handle things accordingly.

As with other cases you were witness to here on bt recently; Chips is proven to follow fair guidelines, eventually being indemnified of any wrongdoing.

It would be appreciated if you encourage solutions by gathering clear evidence supporting your assumptions before making or encouraging any judgments about the internal operational decisions of our casino and others.

As a gesture of good faith, we would be happy to refund the player's deposits back to the original sender.

[r00t3rs]

Don't think Chips has any intentions of paying, stopped replying at all places.

I've sent them a PM on 19th, inquiring as what I said above. I am not sure whether they've been online ever since or just today, but I can see them online about one hour ago at the latest. Let's wait if they'll reply to my PM or not, and if they don't, to be sure that it's not simply because they missed my PM instead of deliberately ignoring it, I'll send them another PM tomorrow.

You're a nice guy still trying to mediate but I don't think Chips has it in them to pay. I have heard more rumblings on various Telegram groups about their scams.

Seems like it's a general trend to just mute people on group chat and their telegram group if somebody asks for what they owe.

I wish I could create more awareness about them by making noise in a bigger way, that's all.

They replied to me earlier today, unfortunately, to summarize, it's basically a "we don't have anything further to add". I'm not sure they completely understand that I inquired for an ADR that they can suggest to facilitate a mediation, as their response to that topic was basically you've reached to an ADR and they'll respond to the --to quote-- "license authorities" when an inquiry was made to them.

I have also added now, thanks.

It just pisses me off that he doesn't give any evidence and shoots absolute lame stuff in the dark and expects me to agree on them

Uhh... not sure if you read the guide thoroughly or not, but a flag doesn't work as "easy" as a negative feedback, it'll need DT supports to be active. No matter how many non-DT members supporting or opposing it, the flag can only be active/inactive with DT's vote. At this time, your flag is inactive due to the insufficient support.

You're raising a type-1 flag, which will require at least one DT support before the banner can be shown to newbie and guests on each and every thread made by chips.

You can ask for support on this thread, provide the link to your flag.

We do not appreciate you encouraging players to leave negative feedback about chips and other casinos without any clear evidence of the the casino's wrongdoing or the player's innocence.

We have provided our stance on this case including supporting evidence and references. Our decision was made in lockstep with our bookmaker reporting and company policies respectively.

Many casinos here have numerous threads made about them, however these are not clear indication that they have done anything wrong. The player is free to report his case to the license and handle things accordingly.

As with other cases you were witness to here on bt recently; Chips is proven to follow fair guidelines, eventually being indemnified of any wrongdoing.

It would be appreciated if you encourage solutions by gathering clear evidence supporting your assumptions before making or encouraging any judgments about the internal operational decisions of our casino and others.

As a gesture of good faith, we would be happy to refund the player's deposits back to the original sender.

Hi, that's a step towards resolution but I had placed a lot of bets what about the profits I made from bets other than the ones you and you and your bookmaker found "suspecious".

Since you talk about transperancy and evidence, please share my entire bet history for everybody to see.

Also, where did you provide "Clear evidence", none of us saw anything. Just a bunch of arbitrary paragraphs about arbitrage.

[memehunter]

As a gesture of good faith, we would be happy to refund the player's deposits back to the original sender.

I am afraid it is more of a fear of losing your reputation and potentially a big chunk of your business. Reputation is everything when it comes to online gambling. What is hilarious is that you want to deny all his profits (without any sound evidence) and send back the original deposit (how kind ) and still want to treat this as a 'gesture of good faith' . If it was indeed that, you could have done it earlier, not after the flag (which you know many will support).

please share my entire bet history for everybody to see.

Please post the complete bet history of OP. I do not see any reason not to post it, as OP has already given his consent, and no fair platform on earth would deny that.

Open a flag against them if they do not reply within the next 24 hours. I will support it. 

Since you have responded within the time frame, I will not support the flag yet and will wait for your next reply. If this case resolves properly, I will also remove my negative feedback.

[holydarkness]

[...]

We do not appreciate you encouraging players to leave negative feedback about chips and other casinos without any clear evidence of the the casino's wrongdoing or the player's innocence.

We have provided our stance on this case including supporting evidence and references. Our decision was made in lockstep with our bookmaker reporting and company policies respectively.

Many casinos here have numerous threads made about them, however these are not clear indication that they have done anything wrong. The player is free to report his case to the license and handle things accordingly.

As with other cases you were witness to here on bt recently; Chips is proven to follow fair guidelines, eventually being indemnified of any wrongdoing.

It would be appreciated if you encourage solutions by gathering clear evidence supporting your assumptions before making or encouraging any judgments about the internal operational decisions of our casino and others.

As a gesture of good faith, we would be happy to refund the player's deposits back to the original sender.

Which part of my post is it that gave you impression that I am encouraging the players to leave negative feedback? I am not the one who suggest or even mention any feedback.

If you're talking about flag, I don't think I do that either. They simply asked about how a flag works, and I explained. If I am encouraging the player to "leave feedback", in sense of a flag, wouldn't it be easier to simply support it? As my support will instantly activate the flag. Instead, I pointed him to a thread where his case can be tried by other DTs, as I am refraining from supporting or opposing the flag for the time being while waiting for development.

So, again, how is it me encouraging a player to leave a feedback? If any [and I believe many would agree] that's me actually giving you a benefit of doubts by refraining from doing anything and simply waited.

Moving to the topic about you would be appreciative if I encourage solutions by gathering evidences, by your permission, I'll publish our PMs for the overseer here to judge, it will be a clear as a quartz that it's what I've been seeking for and trying to get: a solution.

You still have other thing to say to drive a different narrative than what actually happened and what I actually did?

[...]
As a gesture of good faith, we would be happy to refund the player's deposits back to the original sender.

Hi, that's a step towards resolution but I had placed a lot of bets what about the profits I made from bets other than the ones you and you and your bookmaker found "suspecious".

Since you talk about transperancy and evidence, please share my entire bet history for everybody to see.

Also, where did you provide "Clear evidence", none of us saw anything. Just a bunch of arbitrary paragraphs about arbitrage.

OP, I think you should take this "winning".

Like it or not, you admitted that you utilized a betting strategy that's known to be frowned by many casinos. Regardless of whether casinos should or should not accept value betting as a valid strategy, whether players should or should not utilize such strategy, and whether that strategy itself should or should not be considered as a form of smart play that any living things with working brain would logically try [there are bunch of threads talking endlessly about this topic, really, so lets not have another one] the general consensus and ongoing understanding for value betting is that it violates casinos' ToS.

Not to mention that there is no ADR team that could oversee your case and make a binding decision.

Your call, though.

[r00t3rs]

[...]

We do not appreciate you encouraging players to leave negative feedback about chips and other casinos without any clear evidence of the the casino's wrongdoing or the player's innocence.

We have provided our stance on this case including supporting evidence and references. Our decision was made in lockstep with our bookmaker reporting and company policies respectively.

Many casinos here have numerous threads made about them, however these are not clear indication that they have done anything wrong. The player is free to report his case to the license and handle things accordingly.

As with other cases you were witness to here on bt recently; Chips is proven to follow fair guidelines, eventually being indemnified of any wrongdoing.

It would be appreciated if you encourage solutions by gathering clear evidence supporting your assumptions before making or encouraging any judgments about the internal operational decisions of our casino and others.

As a gesture of good faith, we would be happy to refund the player's deposits back to the original sender.

Which part of my post is it that gave you impression that I am encouraging the players to leave negative feedback? I am not the one who suggest or even mention any feedback.

If you're talking about flag, I don't think I do that either. They simply asked about how a flag works, and I explained. If I am encouraging the player to "leave feedback", in sense of a flag, wouldn't it be easier to simply support it? As my support will instantly activate the flag. Instead, I pointed him to a thread where his case can be tried by other DTs, as I am refraining from supporting or opposing the flag for the time being while waiting for development.

So, again, how is it me encouraging a player to leave a feedback? If any [and I believe many would agree] that's me actually giving you a benefit of doubts by refraining from doing anything and simply waited.

Moving to the topic about you would be appreciative if I encourage solutions by gathering evidences, by your permission, I'll publish our PMs for the overseer here to judge, it will be a clear as a quartz that it's what I've been seeking for and trying to get: a solution.

You still have other thing to say to drive a different narrative than what actually happened and what I actually did?

[...]
As a gesture of good faith, we would be happy to refund the player's deposits back to the original sender.

Hi, that's a step towards resolution but I had placed a lot of bets what about the profits I made from bets other than the ones you and you and your bookmaker found "suspecious".

Since you talk about transperancy and evidence, please share my entire bet history for everybody to see.

Also, where did you provide "Clear evidence", none of us saw anything. Just a bunch of arbitrary paragraphs about arbitrage.

OP, I think you should take this "winning".

Like it or not, you admitted that you utilized a betting strategy that's known to be frowned by many casinos. Regardless of whether casinos should or should not accept value betting as a valid strategy, whether players should or should not utilize such strategy, and whether that strategy itself should or should not be considered as a form of smart play that any living things with working brain would logically try [there are bunch of threads talking endlessly about this topic, really, so lets not have another one] the general consensus and ongoing understanding for value betting is that it violates casinos' ToS.

Not to mention that there is no ADR team that could oversee your case and make a binding decision.

Your call, though.

I am willing to accept just the deposit if they publish my bet history and the general opinion comes out as "suspecious behaviour" I honestly don't think I have crossed any lines but would like a second opinion which will help me in future.

[memehunter]

I am willing to accept just the deposit if they publish my bet history and the general opinion comes out as "suspecious behaviour" I honestly don't think I have crossed any lines but would like a second opinion which will help me in future.

Good to see that you are willing to stand the test of honesty here. I mean, the majority of dishonest players would have already chickened out at the offer. I know it is none of my business, but if I may suggest the following:
Since the platform in question has agreed to send your deposit back without any terms (which is a step in the right direction), how about you accept it (not as a final solution)? And after that, let them post your betting history and let the wise and reputed members decide on the matter (through a vote or a committee of selected members).

 

[r00t3rs]

I am willing to accept just the deposit if they publish my bet history and the general opinion comes out as "suspecious behaviour" I honestly don't think I have crossed any lines but would like a second opinion which will help me in future.

Good to see that you are willing to stand the test of honesty here. I mean, the majority of dishonest players would have already chickened out at the offer. I know it is none of my business, but if I may suggest the following:
Since the platform in question has agreed to send your deposit back without any terms (which is a step in the right direction), how about you accept it (not as a final solution)? And after that, let them post your betting history and let the wise and reputed members decide on the matter (through a vote or a committee of selected members).

 

I'm ok with that if @holydarkness is into it.

[holydarkness]

I am willing to accept just the deposit if they publish my bet history and the general opinion comes out as "suspecious behaviour" I honestly don't think I have crossed any lines but would like a second opinion which will help me in future.

Good to see that you are willing to stand the test of honesty here. I mean, the majority of dishonest players would have already chickened out at the offer. I know it is none of my business, but if I may suggest the following:
Since the platform in question has agreed to send your deposit back without any terms (which is a step in the right direction), how about you accept it (not as a final solution)? And after that, let them post your betting history and let the wise and reputed members decide on the matter (through a vote or a committee of selected members).

I'm ok with that if @holydarkness is into it.

I don't think that's feasible. The offer on the table right now is to settle, to accept the deposit and consider this case done.

The general understanding when a player accepted initial deposit to be returned, be it on cases that's solved here or that's already reached that phase before being escalated to this forum, or on other media, is indeed as above, that both parties agree to meet in the middle and consider the issue resolved with certain amount as a settlement.

From a neutral ground, it's a take or leave it case, either you agree to settle or you proceed with your accusation, there is no other option in between. So, yeah, without their specific written agreement that they'll accept that term [you got the initial deposit and continue on with investigation], of which rather no-brainerly they won't accept, the counter-proposal is inachievable.