Negative trust from holydarkness – time to address the real problem: [holy POV]

[holydarkness]

Because I finally fed up... and up...

For the past few years, many forum members approached me, be from direct and personal contact or through open discussion, to get a CasinoGuru-like and AskGambler-like mediation "platform", my answer are mostly always the same: feel free to try that, count me in if you want to, but I will not take any fee from it, and know that your biggest enemy is our forum itself, where once a verdict come and the player didn't accept it [because they wished the forum to peer pressuring the casino instead of taking neutral side], our own forum member will suggest to escalate to ADR, that instantly undermine our own "effort" to be a mediation platform.

My very own cross though, come with a homing being that haunts me on each and every thread, just to derail. You can practically pick a thread, any thread on SA, and you'll see what I am talking about. Anway... sometimes, enough is enough. Pokes can only be pokes before it become one too much.

So, here come this thread.

I specifically make it self moderated, reserving second and third post to screencapture any post that derails the thread before deleting them [it means, Rating Place, give your best to answer directly instead of trying to go in circle and avoid addressing the matter, or they'll get well documented and then deleted.

I also specifically make it self moderated so that this thread, suppose it ends up to a reference post for a flag, will never be eligible for LoyceV's Support/Opposition thread.


Without further ado:

Rating Place, I invite you exclusively to this discussion to be sure we are all on the same page. ALL.

First question: in as simple yes or no as you can, under your capacity and total understanding of sportsbook platform [those who we call casino] and sportsboook provider [like Betby] dynamic, a flag issued by the provider are just that: flag. A warning that sportsbook platform [from this point forward called "casino" to avoid confusion] can just ignore?


My apology, forgot to self-moderate the previous one

[holydarkness]

First archive:


Archive two: attempt to derail the thread by bringing other topic of other thread to this very contained and exclusive one:

[holydarkness]

Reserved

[Rating Place]

You just unlocked your thread so I’ll lock mine. .

I only go in to sportsbooks threads when you recommend that the books can steal. Most of the time I don’t even enter for weeks. Now you are doing binding arbitration in the shuffle case. I waited 3 weeks before entering. Match fixing (integrity of the game) is in question. Everyone that had an opinion on the game said the match wasn’t fixed.

You have done double blind tests. You asked the OP to do a video recording. It’s been a week of questioning. You haven’t said one thing about the game. You need to look at box scores and game flow to determine if a match is fixed. Instead of being a fair arbitor, you are playing the book’s lawyer. Of course myself and others are questioning why you are doing this.

[holydarkness]

You just unlocked your thread so I’ll lock mine. .

As explained in the appendix, I forgot to make that one self-moderated. I want to deliberately make OUR discussion self-moderated to keep it short and neat and stay focused, away from you derailment. Please proceed.

[Rating Place]

You just unlocked your thread so I’ll lock mine. .

As explained in the appendix, I forgot to make that one self-moderated. I want to deliberately make OUR discussion self-moderated to keep it short and neat and stay focused, away from you derailment. Please proceed.

so you want to silence me again. What would you like to know.  1 question at a time.

[holydarkness]

so you want to silence me again. What would you like to know.  1 question at a time.

Stated, yet to be answered, repeated:

[...]

First question: in as simple yes or no as you can, under your capacity and total understanding of sportsbook platform [those who we call casino] and sportsboook provider [like Betby] dynamic, a flag issued by the provider are just that: flag. A warning that sportsbook platform [from this point forward called "casino" to avoid confusion] can just ignore?

[Rating Place]

Yes, flags are just warnings. Sometimes a flag goes up in the middle of a game or prior to a match starting. The flags are all AI generated. Human investigation occurs later.

[holydarkness]

Yes, flags are just warnings. Sometimes a flag goes up in the middle of a game. The flags are all AI generated. Human investigation occurs later.

And by this understanding that you have, you goes from thread to thread, voicing that "flags are just warnings" and that casino can and should just ignore the flag and honor the player's winning despite the provider's flag? Because the decision is owned by the casinos, and if casinos choose to retain the fund, the fund goes into their pocket, and otherwise, if they choose to ignore, they can do just that without any penalties or ramification in any form from the provider, including financial loss from the casino's side?

[Rating Place]

Yes, flags are just warnings. Sometimes a flag goes up in the middle of a game. The flags are all AI generated. Human investigation occurs later.

And by this understanding that you have, you goes from thread to thread, voicing that "flags are just warnings" and that casino can and should just ignore the flag and honor the player's winning despite the provider's flag? Because the decision is owned by the casinos, and if casinos choose to retain the fund, the fund goes into their pocket, and otherwise, if they choose to ignore, they can do just that without any penalties or ramification in any form from the provider, including financial loss from the casino's side?

Sportsbooks always have the final decision on whether a player gets paid or not. There are a couple of books here that seem to just follow flags. It has to do with the RS deal even though the book still has final say. The bad books are more or less stealing because of an AI warning flag.

Odds providers help in risk mitigation. Everything is automated. Auto limits can happen. The odds providers software is customizable. Each book has their own setting based on risk tolerance. The book can override everything.

[holydarkness]

Sportsbooks always have the final decision on whether a player gets paid or not. There are a couple of books here that seem to just follow flags. It has to do with the RS deal even though the book still has final say. The bad books are more or less stealing because of an AI warning flag.

And it is under this basis that you goes into SA, advocating yourself as taking player's side, and that casino has to pay despite the flag, of which when they won't, for a reason that's been made known to you, that they'll have to pay from their pocket or from percentage shared with the provider, you peer-pressure the casino?

[Rating Place]

Sportsbooks always have the final decision on whether a player gets paid or not. There are a couple of books here that seem to just follow flags. It has to do with the RS deal even though the book still has final say. The bad books are more or less stealing because of an AI warning flag.

And it is under this basis that you goes into SA, advocating yourself as taking player's side, and that casino has to pay despite the flag, of which when they won't, for a reason that's been made known to you, that they'll have to pay from their pocket or from percentage shared with the provider, you peer-pressure the casino?

No, the casino does not have to pay. Sometimes the fees are flat fees. Sometimes the RS contract has nothing to do with whether a player is flagged or not. The reps are confusing you when they say there is nothing they can do.

Do you think Betby is making the decision for all 70 crypto books when they all have different rules and ToS?

If a player wins his bet, he should be paid. You say the book doesn’t have to pay for warning flags.

[holydarkness]

And it is under this basis that you goes into SA, advocating yourself as taking player's side, and that casino has to pay despite the flag, of which when they won't, for a reason that's been made known to you, that they'll have to pay from their pocket or from percentage shared with the provider, you peer-pressure the casino?

No, the casino does not have to pay. Sometimes the fees are flat fees. Sometimes the RS contract has nothing to do with whether a player is flagged or not. The reps are confusing you when they say there is nothing they can do.

Do you think Betby is making the decision for all 70 crypto books when they all have different rules and ToS?

If a player wins his bet, he should be paid. You say the book doesn’t have to pay for warning flags.

I do say that, because the casino [sportsbook provider] has to follow the warning flag. You do not believe that? You believe that the casino can just ignore the flag?

If yes, what stakes are you willing to enter for me to prove you wrong [given you have no reputation to be staked here]? I stake my reputation as DT and entire reputation of my existence here, I will cease to exist, if I am wrong. If I can prove that casino has to follow provider's flag, though... 1,560,000 USD a good enough number to show that you're a man with vast knowledge of the sportbetting dynamic? Previously we goes back and forth between 1,560,000 USD, so let's seal it here. Is this good? I can prove to the overseers here that, in many cases, casino has to follow?

If no, then please explain very clearly, yet shortly, why you say as above and parading all over the SA, disrupting mediation with those propaganda.

[Rating Place]

And it is under this basis that you goes into SA, advocating yourself as taking player's side, and that casino has to pay despite the flag, of which when they won't, for a reason that's been made known to you, that they'll have to pay from their pocket or from percentage shared with the provider, you peer-pressure the casino?

No, the casino does not have to pay. Sometimes the fees are flat fees. Sometimes the RS contract has nothing to do with whether a player is flagged or not. The reps are confusing you when they say there is nothing they can do.

Do you think Betby is making the decision for all 70 crypto books when they all have different rules and ToS?

If a player wins his bet, he should be paid. You say the book doesn’t have to pay for warning flags.

I do say that, because the casino [sportsbook provider] has to follow the warning flag. You do not believe that? You believe that the casino can just ignore the flag?

If yes, what stakes are you willing to enter for me to prove you wrong [given you have no reputation to be staked here]? I stake my reputation as DT and entire reputation of my existence here, I will cease to exist, if I am wrong. If I can prove that casino has to follow provider's flag, though... 1,560,000 USD a good enough number to show that you're a man with vast knowledge of the sportbetting dynamic? Previously we goes back and forth between 1,560,000 USD, so let's seal it here. Is this good? I can prove to the overseers here that, in many cases, casino has to follow?

If no, then please explain very clearly, yet shortly, why you say as above and parading all over the SA, disrupting mediation with those propaganda.

then how are these cases getting overturned and why did Betcoin say that odds providers, Betby, doesn’t make the decision on payouts.

Why do you even care about the odds provider? If a player wins a bet, he should be paid. Just ignore the odds provider in your recommendations and decide if the player should win his bet.

[holydarkness]

I do say that, because the casino [sportsbook provider] has to follow the warning flag. You do not believe that? You believe that the casino can just ignore the flag?

If yes, what stakes are you willing to enter for me to prove you wrong [given you have no reputation to be staked here]? I stake my reputation as DT and entire reputation of my existence here, I will cease to exist, if I am wrong. If I can prove that casino has to follow provider's flag, though... 1,560,000 USD a good enough number to show that you're a man with vast knowledge of the sportbetting dynamic? Previously we goes back and forth between 1,560,000 USD, so let's seal it here. Is this good? I can prove to the overseers here that, in many cases, casino has to follow?

If no, then please explain very clearly, yet shortly, why you say as above and parading all over the SA, disrupting mediation with those propaganda.

then how are these cases getting overturned and why did Betcoin say that odds providers, Betby, doesn’t make the decision on payouts.

Why do you even care about the odds provider? If a player wins a bet, he should be paid. Just ignore the odds provider in your recommendations and decide if the player should win his bet.

Yes or no. That simple. Your next attempt to derail will get your post screenshotted, saved on #2, and then deleted

Post removed and archived. No censor, they're immortalized. You just derailing from topic by talking about other thing. Whether or not betby say what they say is irrelevant. It is what you say and believe, and what you made prancing around SA and spreading those misinformation and derailing progress.

Yes, or no?

Merging my own post

[Rating Place]

What you did today was criminal. Shuffle said that a match was fixed and took the $30,000 in winnings. Everyone said the match wasn’t fixed and you ruled for Shuffle. If you delete this, I’ll just reopen my thread.

[holydarkness]

What you did today was criminal. Shuffle said that a match was fixed and took the $30,000 in winnings. Everyone said the match wasn’t fixed and you ruled for Shuffle. If you delete this, I’ll just reopen my thread.

Very well, I'll play your game. To keep another record of your attempt to discredit me: criminal.

Shuffle case: player refuse to cooperate and be transparent [or even pseudo-transparent] by sharing details of his IP address with me, that'll greatly help me debunk Shuffle's counter-accusation. Shuffle has proof against him, I asked him to give me proof to counter Shuffle and he clammed up. The issue wasn't match-fixing, it's the narrative you drive by repetition to the thread.

In fact... as stated in the verdict: Shuffle has the flag. So, it goes with my word above: provider flag, casino obey the flag, in many casinos.

You insist to make the casino pay regardless of the flag. So, again, are we entering that agreement and settle this for good, or will you keep dancing around the corner and too afraid to commit to the truth?

[holydarkness]

Archived and removed, again. Derailing topic. If you want to talk about Shuffle and the verdict, go to that case. This thread is about your reputation, knowledge, feedback, and mine.

Yes, or no. That simple. Yes bring you to an escrow, no brings you to a long explanation.

[Rating Place]

Archived and removed, again. Derailing topic. If you want to talk about Shuffle and the verdict, go to that case. This thread is about your reputation, knowledge, feedback, and mine.

Yes, or no. That simple. Yes bring you to an escrow, no brings you to a long explanation.

go to my thread. If you don't like and answer or want to twist things, you delete my replies.

[holydarkness]

Archived and removed, again. Derailing topic. If you want to talk about Shuffle and the verdict, go to that case. This thread is about your reputation, knowledge, feedback, and mine.

Yes, or no. That simple. Yes bring you to an escrow, no brings you to a long explanation.

go to my thread. If you don't like and answer or want to twist things, you delete my replies.

It was deleted because you pull your trick: hiding behind smoke and screen and deflecting by talking about many other things differently. What's asked is simple, and really really on topic, what you replied is way OOT.

So, yes, or no?

[yet wise people said to play with people your age, so...]