BC.Game locked account after being very active on chat

[Shishir99]

Total bonuses Recived $ 472.38
Total Deposit $ 11.24
Total Withdrawals $ 102.87

I'll have to say that I can understand where their concern of bonus abuser rooted from.

@Warfare,

See, the stats actually speak in their favor. So, if the reason for blocking the account is using bonuses too much without making a deposit, you should not have any complaints. The casinos are here to do business. If you take advantage of their bonuses, they may ban you. But I am curious if they have anything mentioned in the TOS regarding the bonus abuse and to what extent it is considered bonus abuse.

As you said, they have accused you of using scripts. I believe this is a pure lie from the BC game. Their support is known for accusing people without any kind of proof. Even that 7 million withdrawal guy was accused of something as well. LOL.

[holydarkness]

Thank you for your help in communicating with them, holydarkness.
It's not the decision I was hoping for, but it's not the end of the world.
I guess others can be at risk too if they happen to be active on chat and win contests/predictions in the Games and Rounds here on BT ($50 codes) without making additional deposits.

[...]

@Warfare,

See, the stats actually speak in their favor. So, if the reason for blocking the account is using bonuses too much without making a deposit, you should not have any complaints. The casinos are here to do business. If you take advantage of their bonuses, they may ban you. But I am curious if they have anything mentioned in the TOS regarding the bonus abuse and to what extent it is considered bonus abuse.

As you said, they have accused you of using scripts. I believe this is a pure lie from the BC game. Their support is known for accusing people without any kind of proof. Even that 7 million withdrawal guy was accused of something as well. LOL.

I can't remember exactly from the top of my head, as well as can't recall if the explanation given to me was through PM, email, TG chat, or through posts on a thread [or two, or about half a dozen other], but this practice is known and shared by several casinos. The bottom line is, bonus is given to attract game play, to encourage the players to be active in gambling, as well as inventivizing them to engage more in the activity. Not to collect profit through bonus claims.

I am not sure what's the limit of what casinos consider as abuse [I'm speaking in plural here, not specifically one casino] and what is acceptable, but I think it is safe to say as a rule of thumb that if someone deposited an amount that agreeably can be safely considered as very low, while reaping bonus that's about 40x of his lifetime deposit, an alarm will ring somewhere.

As Shishir99 said above, casinos are here to to business. But yes, you're right here, this is not the end of the world. Just... one platform. There are many other casinos that you can play with. I have to say that I regret that I can't get you your account back, but I can also understand that my contact is honoring what risk team ruled, and I guess they won't abuse their power by overruling the team's decision.

I guess we can mark this as resolved [in a way]? I'll appreciate if you could mark it as resolved by editing the title and add "resolved" to it, and lock the thread to prevent further meaningless discussion.

Those said, as a parting words, if I may give 2 cents, perhaps in other casinos, try to deposit more so the casino's risk team won't mark you [though understandably you don't have this intention] as a bonus abuser.

[memehunter]

But I am curious if they have anything mentioned in the TOS regarding the bonus abuse and to what extent it is considered bonus abuse.

I think it is safe to say as a rule of thumb that if someone deposited an amount that agreeably can be safely considered as very low, while reaping bonus that's about 40x of his lifetime deposit, an alarm will ring somewhere.

I wonder if that rule of thumb (although you are not sure) should be mentioned in the bonus terms (all bonuses, including those in chatrooms) as rightly pointed out by @Shishir99. I mean, who does not want free money or money for typing something in chat?  Casinos should have automated this process of bonus acquisition. Now, since OP has put an extra effort (considering nothing illegal has been done) to gain additional bonuses, IMO we should not blame him for being smart.
And what is this argument that casinos are here to make money?
Everyone wants to make money, but what about players? They also want to make money knowing the inherent risk. This risk is there for casinos too, isn't it? Now, for me, the issue is less complex if you have not set any rules beforehand for your bonus/giveaways, and unless a player is taking any illegal measures, he is entitled to his winnings and respect (He can't be called a bonus abuser).
Let's say any campaign manager doesn't have the rule for capping the limit of paid posts. Will you consider anyone cheater/abuser who is posting 100 (quality) posts per week for getting that uncapped payment? Even if he is abusing the definition of abuse will lie in the quality of his posts, not the quantity.

So... I asked my contact to share us his stat, just to crosscheck and get a better image of the situation, about why they deemed you as bonus abuser and risk department requested the ban, etc. the stat is as follow:

Total bonuses Recived $ 472.38
Total Deposit $ 11.24
Total Withdrawals $ 102.87

I'll have to say that I can understand where their concern of bonus abuser rooted from.

[Shishir99]

And what is this argument that casinos are here to make money?

The argument is that casinos spend millions of dollars each month to run their businesses and are here to do business.
They spend money to run the platform, and they have their rules and rights. We are the customers. They offer some freebies to customers who use them. But if we use the freebies without making deposits and take advantage of them, we are not profitable for their business.

Think of a restaurant that offers free drinks there. You ordered one pizza, and now you are taking more and more drinks just after ordering one pizza. The drink is free doesn't mean they will offer you infinitely if you do not order anything.

They will give you free drinks until they notice that you consumed a drink that worth more than what you ordered. Once they notice that you are taking benefit of their offer, surely they will take action against you.

I think you understand what I am trying to say here.

[memehunter]

Think of a restaurant that offers free drinks there. You ordered one pizza, and now you are taking more and more drinks just after ordering one pizza. The drink is free doesn't mean they will offer you infinitely if you do not order anything.

It is very rare to see a buffet that is removing someone, but I can not say the same for casinos. The sheer amount of frequency indicates the need for clear-cut rules. You can not leave free money grabbing oppurtuniy on the so called civic sense.
Casinos are spending billions, true, just spend few hundreds more to have well defined rules, that is all I am saying.

[Cointxz]

Think of a restaurant that offers free drinks there. You ordered one pizza, and now you are taking more and more drinks just after ordering one pizza. The drink is free doesn't mean they will offer you infinitely if you do not order anything.

It is very rare to see a buffet that is removing someone, but I can not say the same for casinos. The sheer amount of frequency indicates the need for clear-cut rules. You can not leave free money grabbing oppurtuniy on the so called civic sense.
Casinos are spending billions, true, just spend few hundreds more to have well defined rules, that is all I am saying.

In the past, many users get banned on using the chatbox/trollbox because they are just collecting raindrop without even wagering in the casino.

Casino like Bitsler is the most popular for having generous raindrop. @Shishir explanation is on point to simplify how casino feels on issue like this.

IIRC Blackjack.fun introduce a wagering requirements back then for those rewards that came from raindrop on chat just because user manage to withdraw without even wagering in the casino. There’s no such thing as free on casino that will last in the long run.

[memehunter]

In the past, many users get banned on using the chatbox/trollbox because they are just collecting raindrop without even wagering in the casino.

Instead of banning them, casinos should have set some wagering requirements for claiming those bonuses. It is a well-known strategy for new casinos to give unlimited faucets/reloads and let people exploit in the short term just to attract some whales. Everyone knows how these inflated player numbers are achieved.

[Warfare]

In the past, many users get banned on using the chatbox/trollbox because they are just collecting raindrop without even wagering in the casino.

Instead of banning them, casinos should have set some wagering requirements for claiming those bonuses. It is a well-known strategy for new casinos to give unlimited faucets/reloads and let people exploit in the short term just to attract some whales. Everyone knows how these inflated player numbers are achieved.

Actually, they have wagering requirements for most of the bonuses.
I know that chat challenges have 1x or 2x WR, while BC contests/predictions in BT 'Games and rounds' have x2 WR.
In my case, I completed the WR and beyond, in total I should have more than $47,000 wagered.

[Shishir99]

It is very rare to see a buffet that is removing someone, but I can not say the same for casinos. The sheer amount of frequency indicates the need for clear-cut rules. You can not leave free money grabbing oppurtuniy on the so called civic sense.
Casinos are spending billions, true, just spend few hundreds more to have well defined rules, that is all I am saying.

Well, if they don't write it on their rules, you cannot really do anything. The other casinos also do not mention it in their rules. But once they notice that you are not a profitable player for their business anymore, they will start finding out how can they ban you. They will examine your account closely, and if they find any violation, then they are fine. Even if they don't find it, they can accuse you of anything and they don't have to prove anything to anyone. It is their own business and they do whatever they want.

This happens often with Bc game players. I don't see similar complaints from other casino players.

[holydarkness]

But I am curious if they have anything mentioned in the TOS regarding the bonus abuse and to what extent it is considered bonus abuse.

I think it is safe to say as a rule of thumb that if someone deposited an amount that agreeably can be safely considered as very low, while reaping bonus that's about 40x of his lifetime deposit, an alarm will ring somewhere.

I wonder if that rule of thumb (although you are not sure) should be mentioned in the bonus terms (all bonuses, including those in chatrooms) as rightly pointed out by @Shishir99. I mean, who does not want free money or money for typing something in chat?  Casinos should have automated this process of bonus acquisition. Now, since OP has put an extra effort (considering nothing illegal has been done) to gain additional bonuses, IMO we should not blame him for being smart.
And what is this argument that casinos are here to make money?
Everyone wants to make money, but what about players? They also want to make money knowing the inherent risk. This risk is there for casinos too, isn't it? Now, for me, the issue is less complex if you have not set any rules beforehand for your bonus/giveaways, and unless a player is taking any illegal measures, he is entitled to his winnings and respect (He can't be called a bonus abuser).
Let's say any campaign manager doesn't have the rule for capping the limit of paid posts. Will you consider anyone cheater/abuser who is posting 100 (quality) posts per week for getting that uncapped payment? Even if he is abusing the definition of abuse will lie in the quality of his posts, not the quantity.

So... I asked my contact to share us his stat, just to crosscheck and get a better image of the situation, about why they deemed you as bonus abuser and risk department requested the ban, etc. the stat is as follow:

Total bonuses Recived $ 472.38
Total Deposit $ 11.24
Total Withdrawals $ 102.87

I'll have to say that I can understand where their concern of bonus abuser rooted from.

I wonder if it's really necessary, to have things spelled out in a fine print, where a fully working common sense should be enough when it is [and it should be] utilized. Interestingly, I mind-drafted a case-example just as what Shishir99 gave, but missed this thread yesterday as I opened it and forgot to mark it as unread to be readdressed later last night. The point is, though, with two people propose similar idea, kinda proof that sometimes something that are obvious when common sense being used, doesn't need a written rule about it.

Another good example that crossed my mind is a situation on an all-you-can-eat-buffet. Suppose a group of 5 friends paid for their entries, and later on the 6th come as they all are going to hang somewhere else. As the 6th already eat, he didn't pay for an entry, just ordered a drink [let's assume the drink is separate on separate package here, and can be bought exclusive to the buffet package, though normally it's all in, take-it-or-leave-it situation] as he's just waited for his friends. He paid USD 11 for a free-flow beer. Later on, when his group grilled a waygu beef, he took one or two bites, to try what they tasted like. The restaurant will most likely just let it be. Upon 50th try though, they'll either charge him with the package, or escort him out. No exact written rule when your group paid and you [not paying] wanted to try their buffet, how much is too much, but common sense will say after three or four chows, either you buy the package or sit in the corner with your beer. I believe when common sense being used, people will also understand, though most likely not written, that the buffet are to be eaten on-site. Taking a whole plate and shove it into a plastic bag to be carried home later is a no-no-no.

Or let's try another example, this time for a case that there is no abuse happened, where a campaign manager didn't have maximum paid post per week and someone wrote 100 quality posts, will that be considered as an abuse? Well, as forum rule dictate, no. All of the 100 is of quality posts, but should the participant be surprised and got angry when the CM tell him that the campaign owner doesn't want him anymore on their campaign or to cap his earning? I'll say if he uses his common sense, no, he shouldn't. Why, though? Because, in a way, he didn't abuse anything. He even contributes to the forum and the project. Common sense. If he's someone that's very good with his mind that he can write 100 good quality posts, he won't find it too difficult to understand that his posting habit, though of a good quality, is not profitable for the campaign, and taxing the campaign owner.

Actually, they have wagering requirements for most of the bonuses.
I know that chat challenges have 1x or 2x WR, while BC contests/predictions in BT 'Games and rounds' have x2 WR.
In my case, I completed the WR and beyond, in total I should have more than $47,000 wagered.

Though my contact didn't spell it out to me, I am somewhat sure that what trigger the risk department's alarm and get them to request BC to lock you out is not the wagering requirement, rather the fact that you deposited USD 11, and claimed bonus about 40x of it, and withdrawn about 10x of the deposit.

A more important question is: where shall we go from this? Shall we continue this whole discussion of bonus, wager, deposit, ToS, rule of thumb, and wagyu beef? Or is it conclusive enough and discussing matters beyond this point is just adding more slap to that dead horse?

[Mahdirakib]

@OP, your case won't get any support from anywhere. You should look into your deposit to bonus ratio there. BCgame is a multi-million dollar online casino, and they have a huge number of active players who make deposits on a regular basis. So, your lifetime deposits of $11 isn't even a dust amount for them. I hope you understand what has been stated by 'holydarkness' above. With such statistics, you will be banned or restricted in any casino. By keeping this thread open, you're only undermining your claim of being a true gambler. The best move would be to lock it now.

[holydarkness]

Given the dormancy of this thread and heavily due to the narrative that unfold and being explained by overseers alongside the entire thread, I think this is safe to say that the case is resolved as OP has no more thing to add? I'll wait until my next sweep and weekly list update, if there is still no rebuttal from OP, I'll mark this as resolved.

OP?

[Warfare]

I have one more question regarding Coco Rush, the Telegram mini app from BC.Game.
I promoted it and referred people to it, including here on BitcoinTalk, where I was the first to announce it on BC.Game's announcement thread.

I made and used to wear this signature:


They offered the option to connect a TON wallet, which I did from the beginning.
When will they enable the direct withdrawal to TON wallet (BC, USDT & DOGS)?

[holydarkness]

I have one more question regarding Coco Rush, the Telegram mini app from BC.Game.
I promoted it and referred people to it, including here on BitcoinTalk, where I was the first to announce it on BC.Game's announcement thread.

I made and used to wear this signature:


They offered the option to connect a TON wallet, which I did from the beginning.
When will they enable the direct withdrawal to TON wallet (BC, USDT & DOGS)?

I am not familiar with TON wallet, but if they offer to connect your TON wallet to [I assume] your BC account, and that'll where the payment be sent, wouldn't be the fund sitting in that wallet? Have you check? Mind to check while I inquire this?

[Warfare]

I am not familiar with TON wallet, but if they offer to connect your TON wallet to [I assume] your BC account, and that'll where the payment be sent, wouldn't be the fund sitting in that wallet? Have you check? Mind to check while I inquire this?

There are 2 withdrawal options inside the mini app:
1. "BC Internal" - I didn't connect my BC account.
2. "Connect your TON wallet" - wallet is connected and has checkmark. Clicking it only shows the wallet address and a disconnect button. No funds in this wallet.

[holydarkness]

I am not familiar with TON wallet, but if they offer to connect your TON wallet to [I assume] your BC account, and that'll where the payment be sent, wouldn't be the fund sitting in that wallet? Have you check? Mind to check while I inquire this?

There are 2 withdrawal options inside the mini app:
1. "BC Internal" - I didn't connect my BC account.
2. "Connect your TON wallet" - wallet is connected and has checkmark. Clicking it only shows the wallet address and a disconnect button. No funds in this wallet.

Well, have you try to use "BC internal"? I inquired to my contact and they told me that the fund for this promo should be accessible through your account's wallet, which... I think quite logical, given it was paid in BC tokens?

[Warfare]

I am not familiar with TON wallet, but if they offer to connect your TON wallet to [I assume] your BC account, and that'll where the payment be sent, wouldn't be the fund sitting in that wallet? Have you check? Mind to check while I inquire this?

There are 2 withdrawal options inside the mini app:
1. "BC Internal" - I didn't connect my BC account.
2. "Connect your TON wallet" - wallet is connected and has checkmark. Clicking it only shows the wallet address and a disconnect button. No funds in this wallet.

Well, have you try to use "BC internal"? I inquired to my contact and they told me that the fund for this promo should be accessible through your account's wallet, which... I think quite logical, given it was paid in BC tokens?

No, I can't use "BC internal" when my BC account is locked and inaccessible.
It's not just BC tokens, but also USDT and DOGS from the wheel of fortune. Logical is to be able to withdraw via the self-custody TON wallet that they offer the option to connect with.

[holydarkness]

Well, have you try to use "BC internal"? I inquired to my contact and they told me that the fund for this promo should be accessible through your account's wallet, which... I think quite logical, given it was paid in BC tokens?

No, I can't use "BC internal" when my BC account is locked and inaccessible.
It's not just BC tokens, but also USDT and DOGS from the wheel of fortune. Logical is to be able to withdraw via the self-custody TON wallet that they offer the option to connect with.

Ohh, right. That fact slipped my mind. My apology. Do you remember exactly [or make it ballpark] what funds do you have in your account? I might need that to plot the best option to offer to my contact to get this done, if we can get anything moving at this point.

[Warfare]

Ohh, right. That fact slipped my mind. My apology. Do you remember exactly [or make it ballpark] what funds do you have in your account? I might need that to plot the best option to offer to my contact to get this done, if we can get anything moving at this point.

700.65 BC, 33.3 USDT & 3996 DOGS.

[holydarkness]

Ohh, right. That fact slipped my mind. My apology. Do you remember exactly [or make it ballpark] what funds do you have in your account? I might need that to plot the best option to offer to my contact to get this done, if we can get anything moving at this point.

700.65 BC, 33.3 USDT & 3996 DOGS.

I see, let me try to reach my contact and see if they can find a solution to get you access to the fund. Maybe they'll give temporary access on withdrawal mode, or perhaps manually send to the originating address. I'll let you know.


Edit: OP, do you mind to shoot me your TG account you use for cocorush campaign? Or send it to their support account yourself, if you prefer not to share it with me. My contact inquired for it.