★ BITSTARZ.COM - BTC & EUR Casino | Get 200 Free Spins + 5BTC Welcome Package ★

[TwitchySeal]

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]

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

[TwitchySeal]

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]

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

[Lucky7btc]

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]

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

[TwitchySeal]

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]

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]

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

[bitstars.net]

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

[btcgmbling]

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]

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]

The summation of my feelings 

https://i.imgur.com/wMoIrQK.png

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.

[bitstars.net]

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

[bitstars.net]

The summation of my feelings  


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

[TwitchySeal]

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]

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]

The summation of my feelings 

https://i.imgur.com/wMoIrQK.png

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

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]

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]

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