TwitchySeal
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2062
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 07:57:08 AM |
|
Just answer the question please. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) If the over under is 0.5, that means there's a 50% chance that 1 or more players violate a term and a 50% chance that 0 do. I think it would be much higher at Bitstarz. What do you think it would be? What do you think would be acceptable?
|
|
|
|
bitstars.net (OP)
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 08:30:01 AM |
|
Just answer the question please. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) If the over under is 0.5, that means there's a 50% chance that 1 or more players violate a term and a 50% chance that 0 do. I think it would be much higher at Bitstarz. What do you think it would be? What do you think would be acceptable? Hi there, I don't have any exact statistics on that, we do not keep track of how many people that are breaching that rule and is suffering the consequences, as again, we let many slide. I can just say that they are a very small minority as I personally get to hear about them, and I also know the amount of active players we have in the casino and the amount of new players we get in. So, you thinking it's much higher at BitStarz, what do you base that figure on? A few people writing about it in the forum when we have thousands of continuous new depositing players? I'd rather focus on the circumstances rather than a number. This is a case by case question. If you suddenly get overrun by a mob of fraudsters opening 100 accounts each and try to claim the welcome package an equal amount of times, I think the ratio is less relevant. What should be focused on is detecting and separating the genuine players from the abusers. Mike
|
bit★Starz - Dream Big, Win Bigger | www.bitstarz.com Bitcoin Casino | 1,000+ slots | Free Spins and bonuses | Biggest win to date: 150.042 BTC | Lightning fast cashouts
|
|
|
TwitchySeal
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2062
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 08:58:54 AM |
|
Just answer the question please. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) If the over under is 0.5, that means there's a 50% chance that 1 or more players violate a term and a 50% chance that 0 do. I think it would be much higher at Bitstarz. What do you think it would be? What do you think would be acceptable? Hi there, I don't have any exact statistics on that, we do not keep track of how many people that are breaching that rule and is suffering the consequences, as again, we let many slide. I can just say that they are a very small minority as I personally get to hear about them, and I also know the amount of active players we have in the casino and the amount of new players we get in. So, you thinking it's much higher at BitStarz, what do you base that figure on? A few people writing about it in the forum when we have thousands of continuous new depositing players? I'd rather focus on the circumstances rather than a number. This is a case by case question. If you suddenly get overrun by a mob of fraudsters opening 100 accounts each and try to claim the welcome package an equal amount of times, I think the ratio is less relevant. What should be focused on is detecting and separating the genuine players from the abusers. Mike I'm not asking you for exact statistics. I'm asking your opinion. This is a hypothetical situation. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions)
|
|
|
|
bitstars.net (OP)
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 09:11:24 AM |
|
Just answer the question please. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) If the over under is 0.5, that means there's a 50% chance that 1 or more players violate a term and a 50% chance that 0 do. I think it would be much higher at Bitstarz. What do you think it would be? What do you think would be acceptable? Hi there, I don't have any exact statistics on that, we do not keep track of how many people that are breaching that rule and is suffering the consequences, as again, we let many slide. I can just say that they are a very small minority as I personally get to hear about them, and I also know the amount of active players we have in the casino and the amount of new players we get in. So, you thinking it's much higher at BitStarz, what do you base that figure on? A few people writing about it in the forum when we have thousands of continuous new depositing players? I'd rather focus on the circumstances rather than a number. This is a case by case question. If you suddenly get overrun by a mob of fraudsters opening 100 accounts each and try to claim the welcome package an equal amount of times, I think the ratio is less relevant. What should be focused on is detecting and separating the genuine players from the abusers. Mike I'm not asking you for exact statistics. I'm asking your opinion. This is a hypothetical situation. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) Hi there, Well, you got a more elaborate answer above here, so I hope that answers your question. But I see your point, and at BitStarz, less than 5% would have anything confiscated in the casino. I just want to point out that this, it depends on what markets you operate in and a lot of other factors. Bonus abuse in general tend to be more likely in certain markets than others. Just as you would assume that corruption or any other type of crime would be more wide-spread in certain areas. Therefore, what markets you operate in could make a huge difference to how many people get confiscated, I hope that makes sense. To answer your question, I believe that the confiscation rate should be way lower than 5% to be fair, and that's what it is at BitStarz. Mike
|
bit★Starz - Dream Big, Win Bigger | www.bitstarz.com Bitcoin Casino | 1,000+ slots | Free Spins and bonuses | Biggest win to date: 150.042 BTC | Lightning fast cashouts
|
|
|
Lucky7btc
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 12:46:23 PM |
|
Just answer the question please. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) If the over under is 0.5, that means there's a 50% chance that 1 or more players violate a term and a 50% chance that 0 do. I think it would be much higher at Bitstarz. What do you think it would be? What do you think would be acceptable? Hi there, I don't have any exact statistics on that, we do not keep track of how many people that are breaching that rule and is suffering the consequences, as again, we let many slide. I can just say that they are a very small minority as I personally get to hear about them, and I also know the amount of active players we have in the casino and the amount of new players we get in. So, you thinking it's much higher at BitStarz, what do you base that figure on? A few people writing about it in the forum when we have thousands of continuous new depositing players? I'd rather focus on the circumstances rather than a number. This is a case by case question. If you suddenly get overrun by a mob of fraudsters opening 100 accounts each and try to claim the welcome package an equal amount of times, I think the ratio is less relevant. What should be focused on is detecting and separating the genuine players from the abusers. Mike I'm not asking you for exact statistics. I'm asking your opinion. This is a hypothetical situation. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) Hi there, Well, you got a more elaborate answer above here, so I hope that answers your question. But I see your point, and at BitStarz, less than 5% would have anything confiscated in the casino. I just want to point out that this, it depends on what markets you operate in and a lot of other factors. Bonus abuse in general tend to be more likely in certain markets than others. Just as you would assume that corruption or any other type of crime would be more wide-spread in certain areas. Therefore, what markets you operate in could make a huge difference to how many people get confiscated, I hope that makes sense. To answer your question, I believe that the confiscation rate should be way lower than 5% to be fair, and that's what it is at BitStarz. Mike Mike explain why do you even have the max bet rule in the first place? Also why is it so low?
|
|
|
|
bitstars.net (OP)
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 12:53:37 PM |
|
Just answer the question please. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) If the over under is 0.5, that means there's a 50% chance that 1 or more players violate a term and a 50% chance that 0 do. I think it would be much higher at Bitstarz. What do you think it would be? What do you think would be acceptable? Hi there, I don't have any exact statistics on that, we do not keep track of how many people that are breaching that rule and is suffering the consequences, as again, we let many slide. I can just say that they are a very small minority as I personally get to hear about them, and I also know the amount of active players we have in the casino and the amount of new players we get in. So, you thinking it's much higher at BitStarz, what do you base that figure on? A few people writing about it in the forum when we have thousands of continuous new depositing players? I'd rather focus on the circumstances rather than a number. This is a case by case question. If you suddenly get overrun by a mob of fraudsters opening 100 accounts each and try to claim the welcome package an equal amount of times, I think the ratio is less relevant. What should be focused on is detecting and separating the genuine players from the abusers. Mike I'm not asking you for exact statistics. I'm asking your opinion. This is a hypothetical situation. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) Hi there, Well, you got a more elaborate answer above here, so I hope that answers your question. But I see your point, and at BitStarz, less than 5% would have anything confiscated in the casino. I just want to point out that this, it depends on what markets you operate in and a lot of other factors. Bonus abuse in general tend to be more likely in certain markets than others. Just as you would assume that corruption or any other type of crime would be more wide-spread in certain areas. Therefore, what markets you operate in could make a huge difference to how many people get confiscated, I hope that makes sense. To answer your question, I believe that the confiscation rate should be way lower than 5% to be fair, and that's what it is at BitStarz. Mike Mike explain why do you even have the max bet rule in the first place? Also why is it so low? Hi there, The reason is that certain bonus abuse techniques can be made with a certain bet size in relation to their deposit. I'm sure you can read more about it on other forums. The size we've picked is in line with all other casinos using this particular rule in their terms and conditions. If you're curious to know which casinos that is, you just have to go back a few pages in this thread! Mike
|
bit★Starz - Dream Big, Win Bigger | www.bitstarz.com Bitcoin Casino | 1,000+ slots | Free Spins and bonuses | Biggest win to date: 150.042 BTC | Lightning fast cashouts
|
|
|
TwitchySeal
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2062
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 02:24:50 PM |
|
Just answer the question please. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) If the over under is 0.5, that means there's a 50% chance that 1 or more players violate a term and a 50% chance that 0 do. I think it would be much higher at Bitstarz. What do you think it would be? What do you think would be acceptable? Hi there, I don't have any exact statistics on that, we do not keep track of how many people that are breaching that rule and is suffering the consequences, as again, we let many slide. I can just say that they are a very small minority as I personally get to hear about them, and I also know the amount of active players we have in the casino and the amount of new players we get in. So, you thinking it's much higher at BitStarz, what do you base that figure on? A few people writing about it in the forum when we have thousands of continuous new depositing players? I'd rather focus on the circumstances rather than a number. This is a case by case question. If you suddenly get overrun by a mob of fraudsters opening 100 accounts each and try to claim the welcome package an equal amount of times, I think the ratio is less relevant. What should be focused on is detecting and separating the genuine players from the abusers. Mike I'm not asking you for exact statistics. I'm asking your opinion. This is a hypothetical situation. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) Hi there, Well, you got a more elaborate answer above here, so I hope that answers your question. But I see your point, and at BitStarz, less than 5% would have anything confiscated in the casino. I just want to point out that this, it depends on what markets you operate in and a lot of other factors. Bonus abuse in general tend to be more likely in certain markets than others. Just as you would assume that corruption or any other type of crime would be more wide-spread in certain areas. Therefore, what markets you operate in could make a huge difference to how many people get confiscated, I hope that makes sense. To answer your question, I believe that the confiscation rate should be way lower than 5% to be fair, and that's what it is at BitStarz. Mike I'm asking about the violation rate though, not confiscation rate. Here's another question to think about: If we got in a time machine and went back to replay the last year and the only difference was a rule that forced you destroy all seized fund: what % of players would have been paid previously had their funds taken?
|
|
|
|
btcgmbling
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 32
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 05:57:45 PM |
|
Just answer the question please. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) If the over under is 0.5, that means there's a 50% chance that 1 or more players violate a term and a 50% chance that 0 do. I think it would be much higher at Bitstarz. What do you think it would be? What do you think would be acceptable? Hi there, I don't have any exact statistics on that, we do not keep track of how many people that are breaching that rule and is suffering the consequences, as again, we let many slide. I can just say that they are a very small minority as I personally get to hear about them, and I also know the amount of active players we have in the casino and the amount of new players we get in. So, you thinking it's much higher at BitStarz, what do you base that figure on? A few people writing about it in the forum when we have thousands of continuous new depositing players? I'd rather focus on the circumstances rather than a number. This is a case by case question. If you suddenly get overrun by a mob of fraudsters opening 100 accounts each and try to claim the welcome package an equal amount of times, I think the ratio is less relevant. What should be focused on is detecting and separating the genuine players from the abusers. Mike I'm not asking you for exact statistics. I'm asking your opinion. This is a hypothetical situation. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) Hi there, Well, you got a more elaborate answer above here, so I hope that answers your question. But I see your point, and at BitStarz, less than 5% would have anything confiscated in the casino. I just want to point out that this, it depends on what markets you operate in and a lot of other factors. Bonus abuse in general tend to be more likely in certain markets than others. Just as you would assume that corruption or any other type of crime would be more wide-spread in certain areas. Therefore, what markets you operate in could make a huge difference to how many people get confiscated, I hope that makes sense. To answer your question, I believe that the confiscation rate should be way lower than 5% to be fair, and that's what it is at BitStarz. Mike I'm asking about the violation rate though, not confiscation rate. Here's another question to think about: If we got in a time machine and went back to replay the last year and the only difference was a rule that forced you destroy all seized fund: what % of players would have been paid previously had their funds taken? To follow up with twitchyseal's inquiry. I would like to know what percentage of WINNING PLAYERS' funds are confiscated? vs your 5% figure for ALL players. My point is, for example.. say that maybe 15% of players come out on top and I assume you only use this dumb rule on these players to confiscate their winnings. The 5% overall figure would probably be much closer to like 25% if you only count winning players? something like that... I would love to hear your response
|
|
|
|
bitstars.net (OP)
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 06:03:14 PM |
|
I'm asking about the violation rate though, not confiscation rate.
Here's another question to think about:
If we got in a time machine and went back to replay the last year and the only difference was a rule that forced you destroy all seized fund: what % of players would have been paid previously had their funds taken?
Hi there, Of the violation rate, still extremely low. You have to realize that the average player is not someone who bets that amount per spin, therefore a lot of players are not affected by the rule. Can you re-formulate that question? Mike
|
bit★Starz - Dream Big, Win Bigger | www.bitstarz.com Bitcoin Casino | 1,000+ slots | Free Spins and bonuses | Biggest win to date: 150.042 BTC | Lightning fast cashouts
|
|
|
bitstars.net (OP)
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 06:07:25 PM |
|
To follow up with twitchyseal's inquiry. I would like to know what percentage of WINNING PLAYERS' funds are confiscated? vs your 5% figure for ALL players.
My point is, for example.. say that maybe 15% of players come out on top and I assume you only use this dumb rule on these players to confiscate their winnings. The 5% overall figure would probably be much closer to like 25% if you only count winning players? something like that... I would love to hear your response
Hi there, Still below that percentage. Again, we have such a vast amount of players (and winnings players) that the people getting confiscated are an extremely small group. It sounds more than it is because people who do not have any issues what so ever tend to not complain online. Do you think we confiscate winnings from 25% of our winning players is that what you're saying? That's absolutely preposterous. Mike
|
bit★Starz - Dream Big, Win Bigger | www.bitstarz.com Bitcoin Casino | 1,000+ slots | Free Spins and bonuses | Biggest win to date: 150.042 BTC | Lightning fast cashouts
|
|
|
btcgmbling
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 32
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 06:14:58 PM |
|
To follow up with twitchyseal's inquiry. I would like to know what percentage of WINNING PLAYERS' funds are confiscated? vs your 5% figure for ALL players.
My point is, for example.. say that maybe 15% of players come out on top and I assume you only use this dumb rule on these players to confiscate their winnings. The 5% overall figure would probably be much closer to like 25% if you only count winning players? something like that... I would love to hear your response
Hi there, Still below that percentage. Again, we have such a vast amount of players (and winnings players) that the people getting confiscated are an extremely small group. It sounds more than it is because people who do not have any issues what so ever tend to not complain online. Do you think we confiscate winnings from 25% of our winning players is that what you're saying? That's absolutely preposterous. Mike Ok Mike, I will definitely take your word for it. You sound like a very trustworthy person.
|
|
|
|
TwitchySeal
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2062
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 06:17:43 PM |
|
I'm asking about the violation rate though, not confiscation rate.
Here's another question to think about:
If we got in a time machine and went back to replay the last year and the only difference was a rule that forced you destroy all seized fund: what % of players would have been paid previously had their funds taken?
Hi there, Of the violation rate, still extremely low. You have to realize that the average player is not someone who bets that amount per spin, therefore a lot of players are not affected by the rule. Can you re-formulate that question? Mike Consider all the players that had their cashouts cancelled over the past year for betting over the max with a bonus. If you weren't allowed to keep their money for yourself, what % of them would have been paid.
|
|
|
|
btcgmbling
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 32
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 06:52:26 PM |
|
The summation of my feelings https://i.imgur.com/wMoIrQK.pngSince the incident, I have started playing at VegasCasino on occasion and some other sites without any issues whatsoever. I would recommend that others take BitStarz advice and "Play elsewhere if you don't like the rules". Needless to say you lost a good player. I am now also too scared to accept bonuses from anyone ever again because of your actions. It was like I was bonus raped.
|
|
|
|
bitstars.net (OP)
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 07:16:43 PM |
|
I'm asking about the violation rate though, not confiscation rate.
Here's another question to think about:
If we got in a time machine and went back to replay the last year and the only difference was a rule that forced you destroy all seized fund: what % of players would have been paid previously had their funds taken?
Hi there, Of the violation rate, still extremely low. You have to realize that the average player is not someone who bets that amount per spin, therefore a lot of players are not affected by the rule. Can you re-formulate that question? Mike Consider all the players that had their cashouts cancelled over the past year for betting over the max with a bonus. If you weren't allowed to keep their money for yourself, what % of them would have been paid. Hi there, Hard to answer, again, it's very rare that a genuine player would get trapped in any way, and I'd rather give it to a charity (as some land based ones have to do I believe) than paying out a bonus abuser. Mike
|
bit★Starz - Dream Big, Win Bigger | www.bitstarz.com Bitcoin Casino | 1,000+ slots | Free Spins and bonuses | Biggest win to date: 150.042 BTC | Lightning fast cashouts
|
|
|
bitstars.net (OP)
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 07:19:31 PM Last edit: October 25, 2016, 08:16:32 PM by bitstars.net |
|
The summation of my feelings ![Sad](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/sad.gif) Since the incident, I have started playing at VegasCasino on occasion and some other sites without any issues whatsoever. I would recommend that others take BitStarz advice and "Play elsewhere if you don't like the rules". Needless to say you lost a good player. I am now also too scared to accept bonuses from anyone ever again because of your actions. It was like I was bonus raped. Hi there, I mean, it goes for anything you do. If you don't like the terms/agree with them, then it's better to not play there. I'm happy you found a spot you like to play at. I'd always look through the terms and conditions and ask on live chat, I do it myself when I play at other casinos. The max bet rule is what I normally look for, and restricted games, but besides that, I can't think of much that would get you in trouble for using a bonus. I wish you all the best over at VegasCasino! Mike
|
bit★Starz - Dream Big, Win Bigger | www.bitstarz.com Bitcoin Casino | 1,000+ slots | Free Spins and bonuses | Biggest win to date: 150.042 BTC | Lightning fast cashouts
|
|
|
TwitchySeal
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2062
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 07:31:23 PM |
|
I'm asking about the violation rate though, not confiscation rate.
Here's another question to think about:
If we got in a time machine and went back to replay the last year and the only difference was a rule that forced you destroy all seized fund: what % of players would have been paid previously had their funds taken?
Hi there, Of the violation rate, still extremely low. You have to realize that the average player is not someone who bets that amount per spin, therefore a lot of players are not affected by the rule. Can you re-formulate that question? Mike Consider all the players that had their cashouts cancelled over the past year for betting over the max with a bonus. If you weren't allowed to keep their money for yourself, what % of them would have been paid. Hi there, Hard to answer, again, it's very rare that a genuine player would get trapped in any way, and I'd rather give it to a charity (as some land based ones have to do I believe) than paying out a bonus abuser. Mike I'm trying to figure out how often you think you're seizing funds from "genuine players" How often is "very rare"? How many possible "genuine players" do you think have had their funds seized by Bitstarz?
|
|
|
|
TwitchySeal
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2062
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 07:36:23 PM |
|
In your personal honest opinion how confident are you that btcgmbling had malicious intent to defraud you or was guilty of anything other than not knowing your rules, on a scale of 1 - 100 , with 100 being absolutely certain he was guilty and 0 being certain he was innocent.
Just a number.
|
|
|
|
btcgmbling
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 32
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 07:48:15 PM |
|
The summation of my feelings https://i.imgur.com/wMoIrQK.pngSince the incident, I have started playing at VegasCasino on occasion and some other sites without any issues whatsoever. I would recommend that others take BitStarz advice and "Play elsewhere if you don't like the rules". Needless to say you lost a good player. I am now also too scared to accept bonuses from anyone ever again because of your actions. It was like I was bonus raped. Hi there, I mean, it goes for anything you do. If you don't like the terms/agree with them, then it's better to not play there. I'm happy you found a spot you like to play at. I'd always look through the terms and conditions and ask on live chat, I do it myself when I play at other casinos. The max bet rule is what I normally look for, and restricted games, but besides that, I can't think of much that would get you in trouble for using a bonus. I wish you all the best over at VegasCasino! Mike Well mike, if the max bet rule was hidden and therefore I was unaware that it existed --- how do you expect me to know that I don't like the rule (until it's too late). Indeed I do not like your terms, but unfortunately I was only made aware of them after I won.
|
|
|
|
Lucky7btc
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 07:59:43 PM |
|
Just answer the question please. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) If the over under is 0.5, that means there's a 50% chance that 1 or more players violate a term and a 50% chance that 0 do. I think it would be much higher at Bitstarz. What do you think it would be? What do you think would be acceptable? Hi there, I don't have any exact statistics on that, we do not keep track of how many people that are breaching that rule and is suffering the consequences, as again, we let many slide. I can just say that they are a very small minority as I personally get to hear about them, and I also know the amount of active players we have in the casino and the amount of new players we get in. So, you thinking it's much higher at BitStarz, what do you base that figure on? A few people writing about it in the forum when we have thousands of continuous new depositing players? I'd rather focus on the circumstances rather than a number. This is a case by case question. If you suddenly get overrun by a mob of fraudsters opening 100 accounts each and try to claim the welcome package an equal amount of times, I think the ratio is less relevant. What should be focused on is detecting and separating the genuine players from the abusers. Mike I'm not asking you for exact statistics. I'm asking your opinion. This is a hypothetical situation. If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.
What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions) Hi there, Well, you got a more elaborate answer above here, so I hope that answers your question. But I see your point, and at BitStarz, less than 5% would have anything confiscated in the casino. I just want to point out that this, it depends on what markets you operate in and a lot of other factors. Bonus abuse in general tend to be more likely in certain markets than others. Just as you would assume that corruption or any other type of crime would be more wide-spread in certain areas. Therefore, what markets you operate in could make a huge difference to how many people get confiscated, I hope that makes sense. To answer your question, I believe that the confiscation rate should be way lower than 5% to be fair, and that's what it is at BitStarz. Mike Mike explain why do you even have the max bet rule in the first place? Also why is it so low? Hi there, The reason is that certain bonus abuse techniques can be made with a certain bet size in relation to their deposit. I'm sure you can read more about it on other forums. The size we've picked is in line with all other casinos using this particular rule in their terms and conditions. If you're curious to know which casinos that is, you just have to go back a few pages in this thread! Mike So why not ban those games that offer odds for players doing bonus use? You noticed the bigger bitcoin casinos don't have wager restrictions. But instead of you adjusting your terms you rather try and fight the bad publicity that is directed to your casino.
|
|
|
|
bitstars.net (OP)
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
October 25, 2016, 08:10:50 PM |
|
Well mike, if the max bet rule was hidden and therefore I was unaware that it existed --- how do you expect me to know that I don't like the rule (until it's too late). Indeed I do not like your terms, but unfortunately I was only made aware of them after I won.
Hi there, The max bet rule has never been hidden, the rules are displayed on many places on the site, as mentioned in the past. Mike
|
bit★Starz - Dream Big, Win Bigger | www.bitstarz.com Bitcoin Casino | 1,000+ slots | Free Spins and bonuses | Biggest win to date: 150.042 BTC | Lightning fast cashouts
|
|
|
|