Stake.com Censors Users, Blocks Withdrawals, and Now Steals Monthly VIP Bonuses

[Saint-loup]

To be honest I don't think any regulated fiat casino would do something like that, they would prefer ban you from using their platform than applying specific discriminatory measures indicating that they treat their customers unfairly or with favoritism whenever they want. But despite its success this casino obviously doesn't care of its reputation. IMO it's because of the public they target : young people that don't know anything about casinos and sportsbooks, who won't complain and do anything if they get scammed or treated unfairly. I think it will change when team or people they sponsor will hear about unprofessional or dishonest behaviors from them, and will want to stop working with them or when regulators from the countries where they compete will prohibit their advertising.

[Saint-loup]

Where did all the Stake defenders go? It’s awfully quiet now. Shame on you for supporting such a deceitful company, one that actively engages in unethical practices and tries to silence anyone who speaks out. Defending a company like Stake only shows complicity with their behavior. The truth is coming out, and Stake won’t be able to hide behind its deceit much longer.

IMO they just think your case is closed because your topic has been tagged as resolved in the thread listing the scam accusation cases along with your other threads regarding this platform. I don't really understand why but I guess the reason belongs to a personal conflict between you and the owner of the listing. But in order to avoid misleading the users you should clearly mention in the OP of the thread or in its title that the case is still unresolved or ongoing as clinexrino did for his own IMO [UNRESOLVED]Rollbit SCAMS money from restricted players with 0% chance of lose

[holydarkness]

Where did all the Stake defenders go? It’s awfully quiet now. Shame on you for supporting such a deceitful company, one that actively engages in unethical practices and tries to silence anyone who speaks out. Defending a company like Stake only shows complicity with their behavior. The truth is coming out, and Stake won’t be able to hide behind its deceit much longer.

IMO they just think your case is closed because your topic has been tagged as resolved in the thread listing the scam accusation cases along with your other threads regarding this platform. I don't really understand why but I guess the reason belongs to a personal conflict between you and the owner of the listing. But in order to avoid misleading the users you should clearly mention in the OP of the thread or in its title that the case is still unresolved or ongoing as clinexrino did for his own IMO [UNRESOLVED]Rollbit SCAMS money from restricted players with 0% chance of lose

Are... we talking about me and my list here in place of "the thread listing the scam accusation" and "the owner of the listing"? If so, then rest assured that [once again] that thread is not authoritarian, I will not abuse the list to my own agenda simply because [borrowing your words], "a conflict between you and the owner of the listing".

It was marked as resolved due to the OP's own written statement, on Stake's ANN thread

After much thought, I believe it's time to focus on peace and understanding. While I’ve shared my concerns about certain platforms and their impact, my intention now is to promote awareness and peace. There are many layers to the gambling world, and I’ve seen both good and bad through my experiences. However, it's essential to evaluate the consequences before diving in, especially with platforms that have complex operations and hidden agendas.

As we move forward, I hope others find peace in evaluating their choices and actions. While my path has led me away from these platforms, I wish everyone the best in their journeys. Peace and awareness are the first steps to creating a healthier mindset, both in gambling and life. Stay aware, stay strong, and remember to always take care of yourselves.

Was it a wrong interpretation that the case can be marked as resolved by OP wanting to focus on peace and understanding? Move forward? And, though his path let him away from these platforms, he wish everyone the best in their journey. I'll more than happy to change it given an insight from other party.

One thing that I think I need to say though, is that I find myself really surprised that you thought I will do such action, that I will abuse the list for a personal annoyance toward someone.

[Saint-loup]

Are... we talking about me and my list here in place of "the thread listing the scam accusation" and "the owner of the listing"? If so, then rest assured that [once again] that thread is not authoritarian, I will not abuse the list to my own agenda simply because [borrowing your words], "a conflict between you and the owner of the listing".

It was marked as resolved due to the OP's own written statement, on Stake's ANN thread

After much thought, I believe it's time to focus on peace and understanding. While I’ve shared my concerns about certain platforms and their impact, my intention now is to promote awareness and peace. There are many layers to the gambling world, and I’ve seen both good and bad through my experiences. However, it's essential to evaluate the consequences before diving in, especially with platforms that have complex operations and hidden agendas.

As we move forward, I hope others find peace in evaluating their choices and actions. While my path has led me away from these platforms, I wish everyone the best in their journeys. Peace and awareness are the first steps to creating a healthier mindset, both in gambling and life. Stay aware, stay strong, and remember to always take care of yourselves.

Was it a wrong interpretation that the case can be marked as resolved by OP wanting to focus on peace and understanding? Move forward? And, though his path let him away from these platforms, he wish everyone the best in their journey. I'll more than happy to change it given an insight from other party.

One thing that I think I need to say though, is that I find myself really surprised that you thought I will do such action, that I will abuse the list for a personal annoyance toward someone.

I've seen your other post on Cinexrino's thread, I won't reply on both topics to say the same thing, especially overthere while I haven't posted before and I think it's a bit off-topic on top of that.
I saw this case (and the other ones from OP regarding this platform) were marked are closed and resolved in your lists, I was surprised since I still see OP posting angry messages and serious accusations against this casino here and in the ANN thread of the platform. So I looked at this topic and the other one regarding accusations of illegal activities in India, and I didn't find anything showing those accusations have been addressed and solved. I deduced from this, it was related in a way or another to the open conflict between you and him, and you've decided to close the case so as to not have to deal with him anymore. I guessed you've chosen the "resolved" option because you've considered having made enough for his cases, but unfortunately users having no clues about your conflict with him could think those accusations have really been adressed and won't bother to check by themselves further. So I suggested Kingbj21 to do the same as what Cinexrino did in order to signal his cases are still open and not addressed.

[holydarkness]

Are... we talking about me and my list here in place of "the thread listing the scam accusation" and "the owner of the listing"? If so, then rest assured that [once again] that thread is not authoritarian, I will not abuse the list to my own agenda simply because [borrowing your words], "a conflict between you and the owner of the listing".

It was marked as resolved due to the OP's own written statement, on Stake's ANN thread

After much thought, I believe it's time to focus on peace and understanding. While I’ve shared my concerns about certain platforms and their impact, my intention now is to promote awareness and peace. There are many layers to the gambling world, and I’ve seen both good and bad through my experiences. However, it's essential to evaluate the consequences before diving in, especially with platforms that have complex operations and hidden agendas.

As we move forward, I hope others find peace in evaluating their choices and actions. While my path has led me away from these platforms, I wish everyone the best in their journeys. Peace and awareness are the first steps to creating a healthier mindset, both in gambling and life. Stay aware, stay strong, and remember to always take care of yourselves.

Was it a wrong interpretation that the case can be marked as resolved by OP wanting to focus on peace and understanding? Move forward? And, though his path let him away from these platforms, he wish everyone the best in their journey. I'll more than happy to change it given an insight from other party.

One thing that I think I need to say though, is that I find myself really surprised that you thought I will do such action, that I will abuse the list for a personal annoyance toward someone.

I've seen your other post on Cinexrino's thread, I won't reply on both topics to say the same thing, especially overthere while I haven't posted before and I think it's a bit off-topic on top of that.
I saw this case (and the other ones from OP regarding this platform) were marked are closed and resolved in your lists, I was surprised since I still see OP posting angry messages and serious accusations against this casino here and in the ANN thread of the platform. So I looked at this topic and the other one regarding accusations of illegal activities in India, and I didn't find anything showing those accusations have been addressed and solved. I deduced from this, it was related in a way or another to the open conflict between you and him, and you've decided to close the case so as to not have to deal with him anymore. I guessed you've chosen the "resolved" option because you've considered having made enough for his cases, but unfortunately users having no clues about your conflict with him could think those accusations have really been adressed and won't bother to check by themselves further. So I suggested Kingbj21 to do the same as what Cinexrino did in order to signal his cases are still open and not addressed.

Thank you for the honest explanation and POV. I can understand that from others' shoes, who only read briefly [as we have to admit that reading all of OP's post, all of them, across threads, boards, topics, and theories, and follow what transpires in full is almost impossible] can perhaps lead to a confusion on why the case is marked as resolved while the OP still... that.

I can assure you and I will really appreciate if you would be so kind to bear in mind for future cases and reference that any conflict or heated argument I have with a casino player or fellow overseers during a resolution attempt will not affect their status on my list in a sense that I will one-sidedly mark it as resolved out of spite or other reason. I'll most likely just leave my device, "walk it off" by chilling and handling other issues and calmed myself and return only when I am sure I am not influenced by anything that agitate me in the past.

One case-on-point will be the case of Rollbit v. tetaeridanus where circumstances kinda stacked in an unfavorable situation, with him being in a bad state and I had a situation myself that his several jabs annoyed me, so I walked away and take the spectator seat, and returned to the case when I think it's time to return to it and re-try to get his situation resolved, all while the status of the case is "in progress" instead of marked as "resolved".

Now, moving to OP's situation itself themselves, I will honestly appreciate your input: do you think the status should be rewritten as "in progress" or perhaps other status? With reference to what OP said as quoted above, as well as the nature of OP's post in general [achieved by reading his entire post history] and the likelihood of Stake addressing it formally and officially is next to the birth of velociraptor within this year?

For added reference and to answer what probably bewildering your mind, if I may speak what's on my mind freely [though I am sure it'll offend OP, but pretty much anything I said at this point is an offense for him, so... [shrug]], the lack of enthusiasm and response to OP's thread is, IMO, not due to the status on the list, but it's because most of the overseer who frequently come to this board already read OP's threads and the messages he tried to convey, with some overseer even tried to explain patiently, and it came to a deaf ear. So they leave. Another come, did the same, ended up with similar result, and they too leave. Ultimately, the low traction of his threads.

[holydarkness]

@holydarkness, 

Your repeated attempts to deflect and trivialize the seriousness of Stake’s unethical practices only expose your alignment with their tactics. Let me set the record straight, because your narrative is misleading at best and complicit at worst. 

1. 100 Days of GDPR Violations – Stake’s Complete Disregard for Law

It’s been 100 days since I submitted a formal GDPR data request as a fully KYC3-verified customer. The law is clear: 
- Maximum Deadline: 30 days, extendable to 90 in “exceptional circumstances.” Stake has exceeded this without providing any valid justification or update. 
- Data Access is a Right, Not a Privilege: Stake’s delays and obfuscation show contempt for GDPR, transparency, and its own customers. 

For 100 days, Stake has: 
- Ignored my legal rights. 
- Closed over 30 support tickets without meaningful resolution. 
- Claimed endless “escalations” to phantom departments that produce zero results. 

This is a textbook example of GDPR non-compliance, and I’m escalating this with regulators. By downplaying this issue, you’re defending clear violations of international law. 

2. Mislabeling My Case as Resolved 

You falsely marked my case as “resolved,” using my reflective post on awareness and peace as justification. Let me be unequivocal: 
- That post was about moving forward personally, NOT about Stake addressing my grievances. 
- My accusations against Stake remain valid, unresolved, and pressing. 

Here’s the ongoing list of unresolved issues: 
- Fraudulent VIP Bonuses: Platinum 1 members receiving $0.10 reloads after wagering millions? This is both insulting and fraudulent. 
- Withdrawal Blocks: Arbitrary restrictions without explanations or timelines. 
- Illegal Operations in India: Stake uses unlawful UPI payment systems to target users in jurisdictions where online gambling is banned. 
- Rigged Games: Evidence of predatory practices across their platform, especially in blackjack and other casino games. 

Your claim that personal conflicts don’t affect your decisions doesn’t hold up. By misrepresenting my case as resolved, you’ve misled others and undermined the purpose of your list. If you care about fairness, update my case to “in progress” or “unresolved” immediately. 

3. The Stake Circus Crew 🎪 

Let’s talk about the cast of characters enabling this circus: 
- Eddie: The master manipulator, building his empire on deception and stolen funds. 
- AHOYBRAUSE: The sycophantic fanboy, more invested in defending Stake’s reload crumbs than addressing systemic fraud. 
- You, holydarkness: The so-called overseer, selectively blind to the mountain of evidence against Stake while silencing dissent with bureaucratic maneuvers. 

Instead of holding Stake accountable, you’re performing damage control for a company that flouts the law, mocks its customers, and rigs its systems for profit. 



@Saint-loup, 

I appreciate your objective observations. You’re absolutely correct that my case being marked as resolved misrepresents the truth and risks misleading other users into thinking these issues have been addressed. For clarity: 
- Nothing has been resolved. Stake’s GDPR violations, fraudulent practices, and predatory systems remain unaddressed. 
- Transparency is vital. Mislabeling my case damages the integrity of dispute-tracking systems and leaves other victims without recourse. 

Your suggestion that I clarify my case’s status is appreciated, but the responsibility ultimately lies with those maintaining these lists to ensure accuracy. 



To Stake’s Fan Club and Defenders 

To the die-hard apologists clinging to Stake’s narrative: 
- Stop gaslighting users who bring forward valid concerns. 
- Recognize that defending a platform built on deceit makes you complicit in its actions. 

Special shout-out to: 
- AHOYBRAUSE: Your blind loyalty is as laughable as Stake’s “provably fair” claims. 
- HolyDarkness: By silencing dissent and misrepresenting cases, you’ve aligned yourself with a fraudulent empire. 



Call to Action 

To the broader community: 
1. File Complaints with Regulators: Stake’s GDPR violations alone warrant severe penalties. 
2. Expose Their Practices: Share your experiences and evidence of their fraud. 
3. Demand Accountability: Don’t let Stake and its enablers continue unchecked. 

To @holydarkness and @Saint-loup: This isn’t just about my case—it’s about exposing the systemic issues with Stake and holding them accountable. You can either stand for transparency and fairness or remain part of the problem. 

The storm is here, and Stake’s house of cards is coming down. 

This is the thread about GDPR, that you're talking about, amongst other [plenty of] threads you have against Stake? Do you mind to substantiate the thread with supporting evidences to validate the situation? Screenshots of your request and them denying or withholding it, perhaps?

[holydarkness]

[This is the thread about GDPR, that you're talking about, amongst other [plenty of] threads you have against Stake? Do you mind to substantiate the thread with supporting evidences to validate the situation? Screenshots of your request and them denying or withholding it, perhaps?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5524433

And have you provided them with the verification they asked; a photo of yourself holding your govt. issued ID as well as a piece of paper proving the ownership of the account which data you requested in the manner that they specified?

[BlackyJacky]

And have you provided them with the verification they asked; a photo of yourself holding your govt. issued ID as well as a piece of paper proving the ownership of the account which data you requested in the manner that they specified?

The answer to your question is in the screenshots, are you not able to see it?

I have already completed KYC verification on your platform, providing comprehensive identification. Therefore, I find your additional request for identify verification redundant and obstructive, especially given the sensitive nature of my existing concerns regarding Stake's operations.

Furthermore, I want to make it clear that I will not be sharing any further verification or documentation with a company that I consider fraudulent.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

And have you provided them with the verification they asked; a photo of yourself holding your govt. issued ID as well as a piece of paper proving the ownership of the account which data you requested in the manner that they specified?

The answer to your question is in the screenshots, are you not able to see it?

I have already completed KYC verification on your platform, providing comprehensive identification. Therefore, I find your additional request for identify verification redundant and obstructive, especially given the sensitive nature of my existing concerns regarding Stake's operations.

Furthermore, I want to make it clear that I will not be sharing any further verification or documentation with a company that I consider fraudulent.

Obviously you aren't smart enough the differentiate between normal stake account KYC and what the support asked for. At KYC you send a picture of your ID for level 2, that's it. They clearly ask for a picture of him with the ID in his hand and the stake username on a letter. It's not so hard to understand this simple question they asked. But yeah, of course for you it is.
Why do you even bother to answer holy when he didn't even spoke to "you"? Oh wait, of course he spoke to you since blackyjacky and kingbj are operated by the same person, yet another proof. 

[holydarkness]

And have you provided them with the verification they asked; a photo of yourself holding your govt. issued ID as well as a piece of paper proving the ownership of the account which data you requested in the manner that they specified?

[...]
KYC Requirements Already Fulfilled: My identity is confirmed through your system. Asking for redundant proof undermines the entire purpose of KYC.

Privacy Risks: Stake has already demonstrated a lack of transparency, so why should I trust you with even more personal data?
Legal Compliance: Under GDPR, data subjects are entitled to their data without excessive hurdles. Additional proof is unnecessary when my identity is verified.

This is yet another delay tactic. If Stake was serious about compliance, it wouldn’t use frivolous verification demands to withhold data from users.
[...]

In other words, no, you have not provide them with the proof of ownership like they asked? The photo, govt ID, and a piece of paper with info of the account details which data you asked? On that case, then the narrative where they refuse to give your and breached GDPR policy, exceeding the 30 days timeline as mandated by GDPR, and withholding information for 90+ days is not true, simply because you are on day 0.

The process itself is yet to be initiated, because you have not provide them with the requirement they ask to give you the data.

This is not about you have had your KYC before and now them asking for some selfie and govt. ID as redundant. It's two whole different things. You asked for the data of the person who --somewhere in the past-- passed KYC3 on their platform, and they asked you to prove the ownership of the account before they can release the data.

I believe it is not hard to understand at all. Like... at all.

If it is, though, allow me to try to explain in other scenario: suppose you opened an account in a bank. You provided identification like govt ID, phone number, email address, home address, some forms, they perhaps even take your photo and fingerprints [my banks do] for their database. Let's say that's KYC3-equivalent of your Stake account.

Three months later, you called the bank, wanting to know your balance or a transaction, or whatever reason you reached them.

Yes, you're entitled to get that info, but the bank are also under obligation and/or entitled to ask for proof of ownership. Thus they'll ask for verification that usually about your DoB, mother's maiden name, home address, billing address, last three transactions, or other. That is the equivalent of them asking you those info prior to providing you a copy of your betting data.

Is it easier to understand now?

So yeah, to repeat, if you have not provide any of the document they asked to prove your credibility, that thread is completely invalid, Stake did and does not withheld information and violated GDPR and mismanage data, as you have not provide the information they need to verify ownership.

So, I'll ask again, in case it's actually already provided in other correspondencies you had with them, but not shown here: have you?

@holydarkness, 

Your repeated attempts to deflect and trivialize the seriousness of Stake’s unethical practices only expose your alignment with their tactics. Let me set the record straight, because your narrative is misleading at best and complicit at worst. 

1. 100 Days of GDPR Violations – Stake’s Complete Disregard for Law

It’s been 100 days since I submitted a formal GDPR data request as a fully KYC3-verified customer. The law is clear: 
- Maximum Deadline: 30 days, extendable to 90 in “exceptional circumstances.” Stake has exceeded this without providing any valid justification or update. 
- Data Access is a Right, Not a Privilege: Stake’s delays and obfuscation show contempt for GDPR, transparency, and its own customers. 

For 100 days, Stake has: 
- Ignored my legal rights. 
- Closed over 30 support tickets without meaningful resolution. 
- Claimed endless “escalations” to phantom departments that produce zero results. 

This is a textbook example of GDPR non-compliance, and I’m escalating this with regulators. By downplaying this issue, you’re defending clear violations of international law. 

[...]
- HolyDarkness: By silencing dissent and misrepresenting cases, you’ve aligned yourself with a fraudulent empire. 

[...]
To @holydarkness and @Saint-loup: This isn’t just about my case—it’s about exposing the systemic issues with Stake and holding them accountable. You can either stand for transparency and fairness or remain part of the problem. 

The storm is here, and Stake’s house of cards is coming down. 

[...]
 - HolyDarkness, you might want to step off the stage before the spotlight turns on your role in this farce.
[...]

I am initially happy with ignoring you, but then you mentioned as above quoted about the GDPR non-compliance issue and how "By silencing dissent and misrepresenting cases, you’ve aligned yourself with a fraudulent empire.", and now when I address the issue and explain what actually transpires, you suggest that I might want to step off the stage before the spotlight turns in my role in this farce, whatever that "spotlight" imply and signify?

So which one is it? Silence so "the spotlight wont turn on me" or my silence is aligning myself with fraudulent empire?

[Saint-loup]

Obviously you aren't smart enough the differentiate between normal stake account KYC and what the support asked for. At KYC you send a picture of your ID for level 2, that's it. They clearly ask for a picture of him with the ID in his hand and the stake username on a letter. It's not so hard to understand this simple question they asked. But yeah, of course for you it is.
Why do you even bother to answer holy when he didn't even spoke to "you"? Oh wait, of course he spoke to you since blackyjacky and kingbj are operated by the same person, yet another proof.  

Are you sure about that? Because if you're right it shows they are not asking the same things to every customers, and they are freely discriminating some of them without justification or notice.



@kingbj21
It's not good to mix your topics like that, users won't understand what you're talking about and will think your issues about censorship, locked withdrawals and VIP Monthly bonuses have been resolved. In addition if a moderator thinks you are now talking about a new subject he can lock or archive your thread.
Besides that, if your request has been sent from the email address registered on your account or if you have initially made it from the chat feature of your account I agree that seems unnecessary and time-wasting to ask those KYC proofs. But TBH I wouldn't say it's the worst thing we've ever seen from them, if they don't ask anything else afterwards.

[holydarkness]

@HolyDarkness  

Ah, HolyDarkness, the self-appointed defender of Stake’s crumbling empire. It’s almost admirable how tirelessly you perform, but let’s add some clarity to your confusion:  


1. Stake’s GDPR Comedy Routine  
You’re here trying to sell the idea that Stake’s GDPR violations aren’t violations because they’ve invented extra hurdles for users. Spoiler alert:  
GDPR isn’t a Suggestion: It’s the law. Stake doesn’t get to “personalize” compliance by adding selfie requests to delay requests.  
Already Verified, Still Ignored: I’ve done KYC3, but now they want a selfie with “Stake Rules” scribbled on a Post-it? That’s not verification—it’s a gimmick to buy time.  
Reality Check: Stake isn’t a bank—it’s a gambling platform known for cutting corners. Your bank analogy is as solid as Eddie’s promise of fair play.  

No matter how you spin it, Stake has had over 100 days to comply and failed. That’s not my fault, nor does it absolve them of legal liability.  


2. The Eddie Playbook: Lies, Loopholes, and Larceny  
Let’s not kid ourselves—this is classic Eddie Hearn management:  
Fraudulent Reloads: Promises of loyalty rewards that vanish faster than a gambler’s bankroll.  
Rigged Games: Stake Originals? More like live theft. The evidence speaks for itself.  
Illegal UPI Transactions: Stake’s gleeful disregard for Indian banking laws is just the cherry on top of their compliance failures.  

Eddie’s built an empire on deception, and the cracks are showing. Stake is one regulatory investigation away from a full collapse.  


3. Clowns in the Audience (Yes, That’s You)  
HolyDarkness, your attempts to distract from the real issues are as transparent as Stake’s rigged odds. Let’s break down your role in this farce:  
Loyal to a Fault: You’ve hitched your wagon to a company that’s burning bridges with customers, regulators, and anyone with common sense.  
Ignoring Evidence: Both my case and BlackJacky’s are publicly documented, independently verifiable, and damning. Yet you cling to your denial like it’s a life raft.  
PR in Disguise: Let’s be honest—you’re doing more damage control for Stake than their actual team. If you’re not on Eddie’s payroll, you should demand back pay.  


4. The Bigger Picture  
This isn’t just about me or BlackJacky. Stake’s fraud impacts thousands, if not millions, of users worldwide. Their shady practices:  
Exploit Vulnerable Gamblers: Stake doesn’t just profit from addiction—they actively fuel it.  
Mislead New Users: Glossy ads and influencer promotions hide the reality of rigged games and nonexistent support.  
Dodge Accountability: From Curacao to the UK, regulators are catching on. The clock is ticking.  

By defending Stake, you’re aligning yourself with a sinking ship. Don’t say we didn’t warn you when it finally goes under.  


5. The Last Act  
HolyDarkness, you’re playing the fool in Stake’s theater, but the audience is no longer amused. The evidence against Stake is overwhelming, and your attempts to deflect only amplify the noise.  
- Stake’s GDPR violations? Documented.  
- Their fraudulent practices? Exposed.  
- Your role as their cheerleader? Embarrassing.  

The regulators are circling, and Eddie’s show is running out of acts. You can keep juggling excuses, but when the curtain falls, you’ll be left holding the bag.  

So enjoy your clown shoes while they last. The spotlight is shifting, and when it lands on Stake (and you), there’ll be no escape.  

Sincerely,  🎪👑
KingBJ21  

Throughout the long words you gave as reply, I believe we all can safely assume that the answer is "no, I have not provide the verification they asked." So I'll try to make it as clear and redundant as I can to explain, and hope that you'll understand.

[Screenshots of the clauses being mentioned here will be provided at the bottom of the post, for reference as well to make it easier for reader to read without having to go back and forth between pages. Links are there to prove that the snippets are indeed from a real article and not fabricated.]

What they asked is not a verification in sense of re-performing KYC. You've done your KYC3 [I'll take your words for it] and they most likely know about it, as they said that they can locate the account through the email address. I also believe they are more than happy to provide the data you requested. If not happily, then at least they are compelled to provide the copy of it to you by the GDPR "bylaws", that you dilligently mentioned and bring to their attention without fail, Article 15(3), "Right of access by the data subject", as well as article 12(3), "Transparent Information [...]" specifying the maximum time of data being handed to the Data Subject.

However, if you're willing to read just a tad bit more below what you cited to them, on 12(6), I would sincerely hope that after reading that, you can easily understand that that is the situation that applied here, that  they counter you with "the controller may request the provision of additional information necessary to confirm the identity of the data subject."

You did not give the additional information that can help them confirm the identity of the Data Subject, so they can't provide the documents being requested.

Thus, day 0.

Provide them with necessary identification as they requested to eradicate any reasonable doubt they have, and the timer will start, we'll be on day 0 hour 0 minute 0 second 1.

It is not me being confused, it is you being confused... or deliberately pretend you don't understand, but I'll choose to give a benefit of doubts and think that you simply misunderstood the situation.

It is not a GDPR violation, it is not a comedy, it is not a clown... well, at least, we are not the clown here. It's either [1] you simply misunderstood their instruction and request, thinking they wanted you to re-perform KYC while you've done it, while what they asked and enacting is GDPR 12(6), confirmation of the data subject, or [2] you understand things completely, you simply refused to do it and take this path.

If this excessive words still failed to help you understand, then I raise my hands in the air and declare that I can not help you further with understanding your situation with GDPR data request.


15(3)


12(3)


12(6)

[nutildah]

It is not me being confused, it is you being confused... or deliberately pretend you don't understand, but I'll choose to give a benefit of doubts and think that you simply misunderstood the situation.

Kudos to you for looking into the nitty gritty of these situations and making it clear what's going on here. Sometimes I get the impression that people really are on a smear mission and could care less about the outcome of their dispute, or the reason why it didn't go in their favor. This would explain the theatrical effect of using AI to write these "gotcha" tabloid-esque summaries which don't appear to be based in anything factual.

BTW, I'm not even a fan of Stake, I just hate dishonest hit pieces.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

@holydarkness, I can only advise you to ignore this clown and his alt account, every word you post here is basically a waste of your valuable time. You could help other people instead of speaking to a wall that doesn't want to face reality.
This individual and his alt account is basically insulting you in every 2nd post and you still take your time trying to understand the situation. And yet the next reply you get from him just is straight up garbage and rude again, not even addressing what you have asked of advised to do.

And at OP, tomorrow you will get you 0.08$ monthly bonus, any plans what you gonna do with it? 

[Saint-loup]

My Challenge to Stake’s Defenders: If you’re so confident in Stake’s integrity, prove me wrong. Meet me at the blackjack tables, or better yet, have Stake release my full betting and transaction history. I dare you.

May I ask you if you count cards when you play Blackjack games, because I'm not sure you can overcome the house edge of the games by counting cards at online casino thanks to the small portion of the shoe they deal in reality but if you get large bonuses, you can certainly make some profits in the long run from them. It could be the hidden reason why they have revoked your VIP bonuses in the same way as they limit stakes (and/or lock withdrawals) of good sport bettors actually, no?

[tetaeridanus]

Are... we talking about me and my list here in place of "the thread listing the scam accusation" and "the owner of the listing"? If so, then rest assured that [once again] that thread is not authoritarian, I will not abuse the list to my own agenda simply because [borrowing your words], "a conflict between you and the owner of the listing".

It was marked as resolved due to the OP's own written statement, on Stake's ANN thread

After much thought, I believe it's time to focus on peace and understanding. While I’ve shared my concerns about certain platforms and their impact, my intention now is to promote awareness and peace. There are many layers to the gambling world, and I’ve seen both good and bad through my experiences. However, it's essential to evaluate the consequences before diving in, especially with platforms that have complex operations and hidden agendas.

As we move forward, I hope others find peace in evaluating their choices and actions. While my path has led me away from these platforms, I wish everyone the best in their journeys. Peace and awareness are the first steps to creating a healthier mindset, both in gambling and life. Stay aware, stay strong, and remember to always take care of yourselves.

Was it a wrong interpretation that the case can be marked as resolved by OP wanting to focus on peace and understanding? Move forward? And, though his path let him away from these platforms, he wish everyone the best in their journey. I'll more than happy to change it given an insight from other party.

One thing that I think I need to say though, is that I find myself really surprised that you thought I will do such action, that I will abuse the list for a personal annoyance toward someone.

I've seen your other post on Cinexrino's thread, I won't reply on both topics to say the same thing, especially overthere while I haven't posted before and I think it's a bit off-topic on top of that.
I saw this case (and the other ones from OP regarding this platform) were marked are closed and resolved in your lists, I was surprised since I still see OP posting angry messages and serious accusations against this casino here and in the ANN thread of the platform. So I looked at this topic and the other one regarding accusations of illegal activities in India, and I didn't find anything showing those accusations have been addressed and solved. I deduced from this, it was related in a way or another to the open conflict between you and him, and you've decided to close the case so as to not have to deal with him anymore. I guessed you've chosen the "resolved" option because you've considered having made enough for his cases, but unfortunately users having no clues about your conflict with him could think those accusations have really been adressed and won't bother to check by themselves further. So I suggested Kingbj21 to do the same as what Cinexrino did in order to signal his cases are still open and not addressed.

My case is also unadressed, hence I am trying to find a support on my flag to try to get to spotlight. I am getting muted in this forum since the day I have written about rollbit. I deserve my compansation but sadly “if razer doesn’t respond” or I don’t get enough support on my case; my case will be counted as resolved by holydarkness. Even if it isn’t.

[holydarkness]

I've seen your other post on Cinexrino's thread, I won't reply on both topics to say the same thing, especially overthere while I haven't posted before and I think it's a bit off-topic on top of that.
I saw this case (and the other ones from OP regarding this platform) were marked are closed and resolved in your lists, I was surprised since I still see OP posting angry messages and serious accusations against this casino here and in the ANN thread of the platform. So I looked at this topic and the other one regarding accusations of illegal activities in India, and I didn't find anything showing those accusations have been addressed and solved. I deduced from this, it was related in a way or another to the open conflict between you and him, and you've decided to close the case so as to not have to deal with him anymore. I guessed you've chosen the "resolved" option because you've considered having made enough for his cases, but unfortunately users having no clues about your conflict with him could think those accusations have really been adressed and won't bother to check by themselves further. So I suggested Kingbj21 to do the same as what Cinexrino did in order to signal his cases are still open and not addressed.

My case is also unadressed, hence I am trying to find a support on my flag to try to get to spotlight. I am getting muted in this forum since the day I have written about rollbit. I deserve my compansation but sadly “if razer doesn’t respond” or I don’t get enough support on my case; my case will be counted as resolved by holydarkness. Even if it isn’t.

Two things: one, it would be advisable to keep a discussion about your thread in your thread, we're going OOT here.

Two, I can understand that you're trying to get a support from someone who currently questioning how status are made on my list. Though IMHO you, accidentally or not, put me in a bad place and add more seasoning to the pot during your attempt, I would appreciate if you tell the current situation of your case as what really and currently happens.

holydarkness does not and will not count your case as resolved as per his sole decision, as what your paragraph seemingly try to depict. And yes, it isn't resolved, that's why he refused to comply to your original demand to mark it as unresolved because Rollbit's final call is not what you preferred it to be, despite my attempt to get it retried second time by contacting Razer about it, and third time while I once again reach him and wrote to ask for his re-re-reconsideration.

During this time, while we wait for Razer's reply, you wrote and asked for your case to be marked as unresolved because you believe that is the appropriate status, and I explained why I can't do that as well as --and this is the most important point-- I'll leave it to the DT to make the call. DT, through the flag. holydarkness is not the one who "count" it as resolved, he let the DT use their voting power through your flag.

Why one month? If you perhaps curious? It's because DT are usually rather quick to jump into action if they found and deemed a wrong has been made. You've announce your flag uhh... pretty much everywhere. I believe the DTs are already aware of it, some [if not most] already gave your whole situation a read, and if they deemed Rollbit is the one at fault here, they've most certainly already support your flag.

But, just in case that some are busy and wasn't able to read your whole situation yet or needed time to decide... end of January.

Rather different than what your post conveyed, isn't it?

[...]

[...]

Holydarkness, I have PM’d you.

Since you left my thread, what will be your update about this situation? My situation shouldn’t be “in progress” it should be unresolved.

Best regards.

And why should it be marked as unresolved? Because the case didn't end well from your side? If we may turn the situation, shouldn't the case be marked as "resolved", given they've gave you explanation, got it retried, gave you an even longer explanation that justify their action?

I am still with "in progress" due to what I show you on my last post on your thread. Depending on Razer's reply [or no reply], I'll wait for a month [suppose he stand firm with both of his feet] to see the general consensus of the DTs on your flag. And will mark the case according to their ruling. As I said, this thread is not authoritarian, it is not up to me to decide what status is on what case, nor the accuser's. It follows the forum's decision.

So, to make things simple, by January 31st, if the case is still open due to no-response from Razer, and your flag is active, which tell us that the DTs think you're the one being wronged here, I'll mark it as unresolved.

[...]

[BlackyJacky]

My case is also unadressed, hence I am trying to find a support on my flag to try to get to spotlight. I am getting muted in this forum since the day I have written about rollbit. I deserve my compansation but sadly “if razer doesn’t respond” or I don’t get enough support on my case; my case will be counted as resolved by holydarkness. Even if it isn’t.

Problem with HolyDarkness is that he is an incompetent self-proclaimed legal adviser clown!

What our self-proclaimed legal adviser clown forgot to do is to take a look at Art. 3 GDPR Territorial scope of the articles he quoted to "justifiy" that a Stake victim has to submit personal documents to an illegal and criminal online casino operation to get the data he is entitled to get!

1. This Regulation applies to the processing of personal data in the context of the activities of an establishment of a controller or a processor in the (European) Union, regardless of whether the processing takes place in the Union or not.

2. This Regulation applies to the processing of personal data of data subjects who are in the Union by a controller or processor not established in the Union, where the processing activities are related to:

(a) the offering of goods or services, irrespective of whether a payment of the data subject is required, to such data subjects in the Union; or
    
(b) the monitoring of their behaviour as far as their behaviour takes place within the Union.

Point 1)

An illegal and criminal online casino operation can not have a legal establishment by law and the European Union GDPR articles are not applicable here!

Point 2)

A victim of an illegal and criminal online casino operation is not obligated by law to submit personal documents to the offender!

Point 3)

Even if you hallucinate that Stake is a legal establishment (quote non), the quoted GDPR articles are still not applicable, because:

1) The processor or controller is in Australia and Serbia, which are not part of the European Union.

2) The subject is in India, which is not part of the European Union.

[tetaeridanus]

I've seen your other post on Cinexrino's thread, I won't reply on both topics to say the same thing, especially overthere while I haven't posted before and I think it's a bit off-topic on top of that.
I saw this case (and the other ones from OP regarding this platform) were marked are closed and resolved in your lists, I was surprised since I still see OP posting angry messages and serious accusations against this casino here and in the ANN thread of the platform. So I looked at this topic and the other one regarding accusations of illegal activities in India, and I didn't find anything showing those accusations have been addressed and solved. I deduced from this, it was related in a way or another to the open conflict between you and him, and you've decided to close the case so as to not have to deal with him anymore. I guessed you've chosen the "resolved" option because you've considered having made enough for his cases, but unfortunately users having no clues about your conflict with him could think those accusations have really been adressed and won't bother to check by themselves further. So I suggested Kingbj21 to do the same as what Cinexrino did in order to signal his cases are still open and not addressed.

My case is also unadressed, hence I am trying to find a support on my flag to try to get to spotlight. I am getting muted in this forum since the day I have written about rollbit. I deserve my compansation but sadly “if razer doesn’t respond” or I don’t get enough support on my case; my case will be counted as resolved by holydarkness. Even if it isn’t.

Two things: one, it would be advisable to keep a discussion about your thread in your thread, we're going OOT here.

Two, I can understand that you're trying to get a support from someone who currently questioning how status are made on my list. Though IMHO you, accidentally or not, put me in a bad place and add more seasoning to the pot during your attempt, I would appreciate if you tell the current situation of your case as what really and currently happens.

holydarkness does not and will not count your case as resolved as per his sole decision, as what your paragraph seemingly try to depict. And yes, it isn't resolved, that's why he refused to comply to your original demand to mark it as unresolved because Rollbit's final call is not what you preferred it to be, despite my attempt to get it retried second time by contacting Razer about it, and third time while I once again reach him and wrote to ask for his re-re-reconsideration.

During this time, while we wait for Razer's reply, you wrote and asked for your case to be marked as unresolved because you believe that is the appropriate status, and I explained why I can't do that as well as --and this is the most important point-- I'll leave it to the DT to make the call. DT, through the flag. holydarkness is not the one who "count" it as resolved, he let the DT use their voting power through your flag.

Why one month? If you perhaps curious? It's because DT are usually rather quick to jump into action if they found and deemed a wrong has been made. You've announce your flag uhh... pretty much everywhere. I believe the DTs are already aware of it, some [if not most] already gave your whole situation a read, and if they deemed Rollbit is the one at fault here, they've most certainly already support your flag.

But, just in case that some are busy and wasn't able to read your whole situation yet or needed time to decide... end of January.

Rather different than what your post conveyed, isn't it?

[...]

[...]

Holydarkness, I have PM’d you.

Since you left my thread, what will be your update about this situation? My situation shouldn’t be “in progress” it should be unresolved.

Best regards.

And why should it be marked as unresolved? Because the case didn't end well from your side? If we may turn the situation, shouldn't the case be marked as "resolved", given they've gave you explanation, got it retried, gave you an even longer explanation that justify their action?

I am still with "in progress" due to what I show you on my last post on your thread. Depending on Razer's reply [or no reply], I'll wait for a month [suppose he stand firm with both of his feet] to see the general consensus of the DTs on your flag. And will mark the case according to their ruling. As I said, this thread is not authoritarian, it is not up to me to decide what status is on what case, nor the accuser's. It follows the forum's decision.

So, to make things simple, by January 31st, if the case is still open due to no-response from Razer, and your flag is active, which tell us that the DTs think you're the one being wronged here, I'll mark it as unresolved.

[...]

Hello holydarkness,

Two adress your two things;

One, it is correct that I should keep away from my disccussion in other topics however; just because 2 DTs opposed my flag it doesn’t change the fact that it is a solid argument or not. 2 of those DTs both didn’t even read my accusation; owlcatz didn’t even finish the first paragraph. He abused his DT power by admitting that he is opposing the flag because he believes I am a degenerate to open a huge position like that.

Secondly, DaveF gave examples from ToS which Rollbit already ‘accepted the terms ’ by compansating players which falsifies his whole argument of ToS which Rollbit lacks any responsibility.

My case is far from over, even if Razer admits or not.

You say 1 month rule is put by you; for what? To pressurise me to silence?

THIRDLY, you are taking everything personal; please don’t. My message is to the whole forum who went silent for my case. I have and had no intention to disrespect your actions in this forum and won’t have one.

Flag has nothing to do with a case being resolved or not. That flag was opened by me to spread awareness on my case and rollbit. If you deem to act on it, you should demand every accuser to open flag and wait for it to solve; to finalize a case as resolved or unresolved. I have seen a few flags here. Please go ahead to my threads and count the supporters and a few ‘fake’ opposers.

Altough we had our differences, your friend AHOYBRAUSE said;

Hmm, not a fan of this user (sorry, but I am honest) but these words are actually on point and describe this whole dilemma perfectly.
If you offer something like trading an so on you simply can't make a short notice maintenance and strip the user of their ability to actually trade, there is no excuse for that. You either announce it before hand (not just 10min) or you simply stop the possibility to trade a fixed time before the maintenance starts so that no user has a disadvantage.
Of course he is asking for a reimbursement, I don't understand why there is even a discussion about that. Ignoring him is such a bad example and not acceptable. I hope this gets resolved but looking at the history of replies from Razor in this forum I wouldn't count on it.

He was talking about Blossom15’s comment. This summarizes everything perfectly.

I thank AHOYBRAUSE for his genuine comment, I have found in my original Maintenance Scam thread.

That’s why I opened a new thread about it. To summarize. As Shirshir99 said in my last post; No one is reading long texts.

People can oppose or not support the flag and still believe I deserve compansation. If you make my case unresolved due to the flag, you will silence me; which makes Saint-Loup’s opinion valid.

[holydarkness]

Hello holydarkness,

Two adress your two things;

One, it is correct that I should keep away from my disccussion in other topics however; just because 2 DTs opposed my flag it doesn’t change the fact that it is a solid argument or not. 2 of those DTs both didn’t even read my accusation; owlcatz didn’t even finish the first paragraph. He abused his DT power by admitting that he is opposing the flag because he believes I am a degenerate to open a huge position like that.

Secondly, DaveF gave examples from ToS which Rollbit already ‘accepted the terms ’ by compansating players which falsifies his whole argument of ToS which Rollbit lacks any responsibility.

My case is far from over, even if Razer admits or not.

You say 1 month rule is put by you; for what? To pressurise me to silence?

THIRDLY, you are taking everything personal; please don’t. My message is to the whole forum who went silent for my case. I have and had no intention to disrespect your actions in this forum and won’t have one.

Flag has nothing to do with a case being resolved or not. That flag was opened by me to spread awareness on my case and rollbit. If you deem to act on it, you should demand every accuser to open flag and wait for it to solve; to finalize a case as resolved or unresolved. I have seen a few flags here. Please go ahead to my threads and count the supporters and a few ‘fake’ opposers.

Altough we had our differences, your friend AHOYBRAUSE said;

Hmm, not a fan of this user (sorry, but I am honest) but these words are actually on point and describe this whole dilemma perfectly.
If you offer something like trading an so on you simply can't make a short notice maintenance and strip the user of their ability to actually trade, there is no excuse for that. You either announce it before hand (not just 10min) or you simply stop the possibility to trade a fixed time before the maintenance starts so that no user has a disadvantage.
Of course he is asking for a reimbursement, I don't understand why there is even a discussion about that. Ignoring him is such a bad example and not acceptable. I hope this gets resolved but looking at the history of replies from Razor in this forum I wouldn't count on it.

He was talking about Blossom15’s comment. This summarizes everything perfectly.

I thank AHOYBRAUSE for his genuine comment, I have found in my original Maintenance Scam thread.

That’s why I opened a new thread about it. To summarize. As Shirshir99 said in my last post; No one is reading long texts.

People can oppose or not support the flag and still believe I deserve compansation. If you make my case unresolved due to the flag, you will silence me; which makes Saint-Loup’s opinion valid.

As we are on an agreement that the discussion about your situation should be keep in your own thread and away from other topic, I hope we can reach a mutual understanding that this is [hopefully] the last time I address your matter here or other threads about other matters [of someone else's, just to be clear] and will continue the topic on your own thread, as I have to say that though this is where we should end our talk about your issue, some matters are indeed interesting and need to be addressed. So, I'll jump to your thread right after this, only finishing out one or two matter here, as they do belong to this thread, to clear the air.

The thing I want to dissect here to leave no room for any doubt or other people to twist into a different narrative is the one month "rule", as it is actually not a rule and I am not "placing" it as a means like you perceived; to pressurize you. I've covered the reason of this "timer" on previous post, if I may quote myself,

[...]
Why one month? If you perhaps curious? It's because DT are usually rather quick to jump into action if they found and deemed a wrong has been made. You've announce your flag uhh... pretty much everywhere. I believe the DTs are already aware of it, some [if not most] already gave your whole situation a read, and if they deemed Rollbit is the one at fault here, they've most certainly already support your flag.[...]

To further emphasize, DT are usually quick [yet thoughtful] in taking action against or in favor to a flag. Especially when that flag has been announced on Request Support (or Opposition) for Flags here!, as yours did.

Given you've also create your own thread on repu to announce the flag and request for support, I think it's safe to say most of the DT are already aware of your flag. The low traction [as I've mentioned somewhere in the past] is probably because they choose to abstain, because --like me-- they can see from both perspective for this case, and they can't support or oppose the flag as it'll violate the clause they entered upon taking action for that flag.

With this in mind, would it not be valid to question what is the proper timeline to wait for other DT to notice, to decide, and to take action? One month? One year? One week? Thus, the safest period that crossed my mind was one month [one and a half month, give or take couple of days, to be exact]. And that is not to pressurize you, it is simply because I am failed to see what would two or three months or one semester would do, if most of the DTs have already made their decision.

It'll just put you in a misery of waiting and hoping for more support [suppose the flag does not go active].

So, why do we need to inflict that while one month is "enough"? And we can close it, for your sake, so you can start taking a path of closure.

Hopefully you can see what I had in my mind when I proposed it.

If... by some miracle, or as fate will it, a new evidence or incriminating situation arise or other case happen that make the DTs reconsider the old flag that you raised in the past, that they did not support because they couldn't at that time but can at that future time due to the development of the situation, you can always nudge me.