Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789101112 LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 222
  1. #161
    marko6's Avatar
    marko6 is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    August 2013
    Posts
    89
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 51 Times in 33 Posts

    Default Why Club Gold Casino is breaching achievements made in RESPONSIBLE GAMING

    After my 50k win at "Rome and Glory" in October 2012 I wanted to self-exclude myself until all winnings have been paid. But the casino told me that I will not receive my winnings, if I do so!!!!!!!!!! Leopold's experiment (see post #116) confirms that the casino keeps on lying to new customers in the same way up to the present day.

    Doesn't this behavior BREACH any achievements made in RESPONSIBLE GAMING??????????

    marko6

  2. #162
    Redbush54's Avatar
    Redbush54 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    September 2008
    Location
    Some US state
    Posts
    654
    Thanks
    409
    Thanked 408 Times in 222 Posts

    Default

    First off, I can't say whether the player should be paid or not. I'm not exactly sure what I think. What I do know is that this thread has gone on and on and on repeating the same thing over and over and over. I find the fact that the program isn't replying to any of the questions raised troubling. As a platinum sponsor I would think a response is required. If the GPWA can't intervene and get the questions answered, irregardless of who is right or wrong in this matter, then I feel once again that the GPWA is only here for the money. The work that Michael did regarding the license is greatly appreciated but as affiliates if we have a player that encounters the same situation as marko can we expect any help from the GPWA in reaching a solution? Many times we have been told so and so is at the conference and as soon as they return this issue will be dealt with. Well imo if you there isn't anyone watching the store than maybe you shouldn't go to the conference.

    I'm asking that GPWA provide a stance on this thread and either work with the player and the op to reach a solution or close this thread stating that there's nothing that can be done and then programs like this one will continue with roguish behavior which then would appear that the GPWA is only about the money.

    This is only my opinion so please don't crucify me for expressing my freedom of speech.

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Redbush54 For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (7 October 2013), FictionNet (7 October 2013)

  4. #163
    marko6's Avatar
    marko6 is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    August 2013
    Posts
    89
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 51 Times in 33 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Redbush54 View Post
    I find the fact that the program isn't replying to any of the questions raised troubling. As a platinum sponsor I would think a response is required. If the GPWA can't intervene and get the questions answered, irregardless of who is right or wrong in this matter, then I feel once again that the GPWA is only here for the money. The work that Michael did regarding the license is greatly appreciated but as affiliates if we have a player that encounters the same situation as marko can we expect any help from the GPWA in reaching a solution? Many times we have been told so and so is at the conference and as soon as they return this issue will be dealt with.
    Michael assured me that he will be in contact with Playtech during the exhibition in Barcelona. This exhibition will be from October 8-10, so we need to wait a few more days. I keep on posting, because I feel that some of my recent thoughts add a new perspective. For example the main thought in post #176: To put it in a nutshell, Club Gold Casino told me that I will not receive my winnings, if I self-exclude (because my account would be locked then)!!!!!!!!!! That is A SEVERE VIOLATION of all achievements of Responsible Gaming.

    I would have locked my casino account after my 50k win (I would not have asked for it otherwise!), if the casino had confirmed that I will be receiving my winnings, even with a locked account.

    The casino seduced me to keep on playing until I reached a total balance of approximately 100k (!). Again, I would have locked my casino account with that balance, if the casino had confirmed that I will be receiving my winnings with a locked account. All the time the casino made me believe that I need an unlocked account to receive my winnings. And that is why I now request a full refund of my highest balance. Remember: After having reached those 100k the casino limited my game play to slots!

    marko6
    Last edited by marko6; 7 October 2013 at 9:38 am.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to marko6 For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (7 October 2013)

  6. #164
    universal4's Avatar
    universal4 is offline Forum Administrator
    Join Date
    July 2003
    Location
    Courage is being scared to death...and saddling up anyway. John Wayne
    Posts
    31,618
    Thanks
    3,586
    Thanked 8,647 Times in 5,509 Posts

    Default

    Michael assured me that he will be in contact with Playtech during the exhibition in Barcelona. This exhibition will be from October 8-10, so we need to wait a few more days.
    Then why are you going on and on and only cautioning people to wait when they don't necessarity agree with you?

    You keep expressing things as fact, when not all of them have been proven as FACTS.

    I agree that we need more FACTS, but just because you keep stating something over and over does not make it a fact without supporting evidence.

    I also would like to see a little more evidence from Playtech if we are able, and I hope that Michael is able to provide more insight into this after his meetings in Spain.

    Rick
    Universal4

  7. #165
    marko6's Avatar
    marko6 is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    August 2013
    Posts
    89
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 51 Times in 33 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by universal4 View Post
    Then why are you going on and on and only cautioning people to wait when they don't necessarity agree with you? You keep expressing things as fact, when not all of them have been proven as FACTS.
    I keep on posting, because in my last posts I added new thoughts that I did not have when I started this thread:

    - I explained why the chat from October 2012 (in which I was told that I don't get my money with a locked account) MUST exist.
    - I also explained why the email (which led to my account lock in April 2013) MUST exist.

    I just want to convince you that Club Gold Casino has the facts (transcripts), but doesn't think it necessary to share them with us. What would you do if you won really big (the biggest win you ever had), and your casino tells you that it will keep your money, if you lock your account to protect yourself from losing it again???

    marko6
    Last edited by marko6; 7 October 2013 at 2:36 pm.

  8. #166
    -Shay- is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    November 2012
    Posts
    3,062
    Thanks
    12,211
    Thanked 3,134 Times in 1,686 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marko6 View Post
    I keep on posting, because in my last posts I added new thoughts that I did not have when I started this thread:

    - I explained why the chat from October 2012 (in which I was told that I don't get my money with a locked account) MUST exist.
    - I also explained why the email (which led to my account lock in April 2013) MUST exist.

    I just want to convince you that Club Gold Casino has the facts (transcripts), but doesn't think it necessary to share them with us. What would you do if you won really big (the biggest win you ever had), and your casino tells you that it will keep your money, if you lock your account to protect yourself from losing it again???

    marko6
    marko,

    I suggest playing the waiting game for right now. Michael suggested that he would be in contact with Playtech at the Barcelona conference regarding this matter. My expectation is that he will update with something useful within seven days of the conference's conclusion.

    Until such a time, silence is golden. Unless someone else posts something or more facts with evidence comes up, there's really nothing more to hash out in this particular venue until Michael comes back with information from his time with Playtech.

    You have the support of several people and I think most everyone who frequents this forum knows the "character" of Club Gold Casino. Let things play through on this particular venue (GPWA) based on Michael's meeting and a timeline of reasonable expectation and then proceed from there. My offer still stands, so I do have faith that everyone will act in the best interest of the situation.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to -Shay- For This Useful Post:

    marko6 (8 October 2013)

  10. #167
    marko6's Avatar
    marko6 is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    August 2013
    Posts
    89
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 51 Times in 33 Posts

    Default There is NEWS from PLAYTECH

    There is news from Playtech, which I pass on to you. Here is a quote from an email, which I received from a Playtech employee:

    "I am afraid that we do not have records of e-mails between you and the operator and although it would be theoretically technically possible for Playtech to access the chat logs from the back end of the system, these logs and all other player data are the property of Club Gold Casino. We cannot therefore go into the system, access these logs and pass them to you, without proper authorisation. To do so would be a breach of our contract with Club Gold Casino and in breach of Data Protection Laws. We are under contract with Club Gold Casino who will not allow us to go into the system and pass logs to you."

    So, Playtech is able to pass the chat logs to me, if I obtain proper authorisation from Club Gold Casino. That is why I am writing this post. I KINDLY ask Club Gold Casino to grant this authorisation for all chats that I had with the casino. I believe that these chats belong to the casino AND to me, since we both can be considered as AUTHORS of these chats. One half of the text contained in these chats was writtten by me.

    To make sure, that Club Gold does not remain silent again (as it did before), I want to emphasize that not granting this authorisation will make everyone believe that Club Gold wants to hide relevant information contained in these chats. I also want to emphasize that I will accept a fair settlement of this issue.

    All I want now is transparency, and such an authorisation is the only way to achieve transparency.

    marko6

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to marko6 For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (13 October 2013)

  12. #168
    universal4's Avatar
    universal4 is offline Forum Administrator
    Join Date
    July 2003
    Location
    Courage is being scared to death...and saddling up anyway. John Wayne
    Posts
    31,618
    Thanks
    3,586
    Thanked 8,647 Times in 5,509 Posts

    Default

    This is actually a good development, and one that should have been persued from the beginning instead of what did transpire. (this is what Shay suggested first, and a few others suggested was a good idea)

    I am surprised that Playtech does take the stance that authorization can ONLY come from the Casino, since within the chat the player id should be clearly identified, and the email address on record for that player id is held by Playtech.

    I would understand this (and would prefer) if ONLY one of those two could request the logs, but at least we should have no reason that the chat logs can not be investigated to see what was said concerning the locking, closing or otherwise actions taken on the account and verify the timetables.

    Rick
    Universal4

  13. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to universal4 For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (13 October 2013), marko6 (14 October 2013), Redbush54 (13 October 2013)

  14. #169
    thebookiesoffers is offline Former Member
    Join Date
    November 2009
    Location
    Leicester, UK
    Posts
    3,225
    Thanks
    414
    Thanked 1,764 Times in 1,009 Posts

    Default

    to finish this once and for all cgc just need to give playtech permission to send GPWA ALL the log chats and that will be the end of it all either way

  15. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to thebookiesoffers For This Useful Post:

    -Shay- (13 October 2013), marko6 (14 October 2013), Roulette Zeitung (13 October 2013)

  16. #170
    Roulette Zeitung is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    July 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    4,445
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks
    6,015
    Thanked 6,683 Times in 2,949 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thebookiesoffers View Post
    to finish this once and for all cgc just need to give playtech permission to send GPWA ALL the log chats and that will be the end of it all either way
    A Platinum sponsor can't refuse.

    Leopold

  17. #171
    marko6's Avatar
    marko6 is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    August 2013
    Posts
    89
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 51 Times in 33 Posts

    Default

    Dino and Carmel from Club Gold Casino,
    once again I kindly ask you to grant your authorisation that Playtech may pass on all chat logs (that I had with your casino) to GPWA and/or to me.

    I believe that granting such an authorisation should not take more than 24 hours, especially since I am the co-author of these chats. One half of the text contained in these chats was written by me.

    marko6

  18. #172
    baldidiot is online now Private Member
    Join Date
    January 2010
    Posts
    4,974
    Thanks
    427
    Thanked 2,271 Times in 1,510 Posts

    Default

    I'll be honest, I haven't read all of this. But just wanted to chime in about the chat logs..

    It looks like Curacao has a (very) new data protection law (http://www.curacaochronicle.com/poli...-act-in-force/) which, if it's anything like the one we have in the UK, means you have a right to see whatever info they hold on you. I couldn't find much info on it, but might be worth looking into and, if this is correct, then making a formal request for the logs under data protection laws.

    But realistically, from my brief scanning of the thread, I don't see any money getting refunded here. If the casino did break rules to allow you to continue playing then there could be negative implications for the casino (ie: fines from a regulator, loss of licence, slap on the wrist from playtech, loss of sponsorship etc..) but probably not more than that.
    onlinegamblingwebsites.com - Formally known as goodbonusguide.

    Gambling Domains: Small clear out of some of the domains we've been hoarding on Dan - see the list here. Prices negotiable, and willing to swap for decent links.

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to baldidiot For This Useful Post:

    thebookiesoffers (14 October 2013)

  20. #173
    Anthony's Avatar
    Anthony is online now GPWA/APCW Program Director
    Join Date
    June 2003
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    7,210
    Blog Entries
    67
    Thanks
    2,106
    Thanked 3,521 Times in 1,844 Posts

    Default

    I wanted to post a brief summary of the investigation I have done so far regarding Marko6.

    First Marko6 presented a timeline of events that stated he notified the casino in April of a gambling problem and they did not take action and because of it he lost his winnings. CGC had a different timeline of events showing it was not until June when the player notified them of a gambling problem. Marko6 presented proof, an email that corroborated his timeline. After further investigation it was proven the email was forged.

    Second, Marko6 stated he changed his limit to 1 euro and it was changed, another serious accusation. CGC shared the log showing Marko6 set the limit and changed it himself. After I presented Marko6 with the evidence he then said he shouldnít have been able to do it. It still didnít change the fact he did make the change himself.

    Third, Marko6 gave me another date in which he stated he did not make a limit change yet one was made. That is also a serious accusation. So I went back to CGC only to find out Marko6 had customer service change the limit for him. When I presented this to Marko6, he said he never stated the change was without his consent, just that he didnít do it. So again he admitted his deception and changed the discussion to one of general policy of what should and should not be done, instead of what CGC actually did wrong in his particular case.

    Fourth, Marko6 stated he never saw a way to self-exclude; the option was not available to him. I went to CGC again and they showed me how it was just below where he made multiple limit changes. Then Marko6 stated in the thread he did not self-exclude because he thought he would not get paid if he did.

    I reviewed many of the logs. When Michael returns tomorrow, he will discuss Playtechís review of them. From what I saw, the CGC timeline was always correct and CGC followed the players requests with the exception of changing the cashout limit. As soon as a gambling problem was mentioned, CGC froze the account and gave Marko6 instructions on how to proceed and protect himself from further gambling problems. Still after the notification in June, Marko6 tried to get the freeze lifted on multiple occasions; Club Gold Casino did not violate their problem gambler policy and complied.

    As each item was proven wrong, he moved on to a new one. Marko6 clearly has a gambling problem and wants to blame everyone else for it. As with most addicts, personal responsibility for ones actions does not fit into the equation. It is an unfortunate situation and I hope he seeks the help he needs. Separately, having a discussion of what casinos/affiliates can do better to identify addiction would be good for the industry as a whole.

    Michael is handling it from here and will be back in the office tomorrow; my investigations in this case are concluded.
    I am here to help if you have any issues with an affiliate program.
    Become involved in GPWA to truly make the association your own:
    Apply for Private Membership | Apply for the GPWA Seal | Partner with a GPWA Sponsor | Volunteer as a Moderator


  21. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Anthony For This Useful Post:

    DinoG (14 October 2013), Redbush54 (14 October 2013), Sergej_AGR (15 October 2013), TheGooner (14 October 2013), universal4 (14 October 2013)

  22. #174
    thebookiesoffers is offline Former Member
    Join Date
    November 2009
    Location
    Leicester, UK
    Posts
    3,225
    Thanks
    414
    Thanked 1,764 Times in 1,009 Posts

    Default

    looks like the OP is full of **** then. from this point on, I am out

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to thebookiesoffers For This Useful Post:


  24. #175
    Redbush54's Avatar
    Redbush54 is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    September 2008
    Location
    Some US state
    Posts
    654
    Thanks
    409
    Thanked 408 Times in 222 Posts

    Default

    Yup agreed and he appears to have convinced ppl he was in the right. Final word from Michael and this thread should be closed.

  25. The Following User Says Thank You to Redbush54 For This Useful Post:


  26. #176
    marko6's Avatar
    marko6 is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    August 2013
    Posts
    89
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 51 Times in 33 Posts

    Default I am sad, really sad

    I really had expected a thorough investigation, Anthony, and I still do hope that Michael will draw a different picture. Michael wrote, that "it is best to take a circumspect look at allegations that are made, and to not be so quick to jump to conclusions."

    I can imagine how hard it is to believe someone who did something wrong (as I did with the faked email), but that is the only thing that I did wrong in this case. I had apologized for it. All the other results of Anthony's investigation are just not true:

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
    Second, Marko6 stated he changed his limit to 1 euro and it was changed, another serious accusation. CGC shared the log showing Marko6 set the limit and changed it himself. After I presented Marko6 with the evidence he then said he shouldn’t have been able to do it. It still didn’t change the fact he did make the change himself.
    Where did I state that Club Gold changed my limits WITHOUT my consent? I never stated that. I know that I always set my limits myself through the software, and I also know that Club Gold Casino removed all these limits when I asked for it in the chat. The Playtech software does not allow players to change limits with immediate effect. Please read the relevant posts and emails more carefully! I never accused Club Gold Casino of having removed my limits without my consent. BUT, being an addicted gambler, I know how hard it is to stop playing when you know that you have a lot of money in your casino account (that you may not cash out due to the monthly withdrawal limit) and when you realize (!) that any wagering limits set by you can be removed by the casino with immediate effect. What I said in my post was, that a casino should NEVER be able to remove a wagering limit set by the player with immediate effect, EVEN IF THE PLAYER ASKS FOR IT. Please read my posts carefully! Having faked one email (under pressure) does not mean, that my complaint is wrong. Why is Anthony not mentioning, that Club Gold Casino is lying to winning players, when making them believe that they need an open account to get paid? DOESN'T THAT LIE CAUSE EVEN MORE DAMAGE THAN MY FAKED EMAIL?

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
    Third, Marko6 gave me another date in which he stated he did not make a limit change yet one was made. That is also a serious accusation. So I went back to CGC only to find out Marko6 had customer service change the limit for him. When I presented this to Marko6, he said he never stated the change was without his consent, just that he didn’t do it. So again he admitted his deception and changed the discussion to one of general policy of what should and should not be done, instead of what CGC actually did wrong in his particular case.
    Again, Anthony is not carefully reading my posts and my emails. I never said, that Club Gold Casino made limit changes without my consent. I was not able to change any limits with immediate effect by myself. As already mentioned the Playtech software requires a player to wait 7 days up to 1 month, until any change goes into effect. All limits changes were done by the casino, when I asked for it by chat. But, Anthony, you did not get the point: I was saying, that a monthly wagering limit set by the player should not be changeable by anyone. The player had a good reason when setting that limit. No casino software should enable the casino to change limits set by the player.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
    Fourth, Marko6 stated he never saw a way to self-exclude; the option was not available to him. I went to CGC again and they showed me how it was just below where he made multiple limit changes. Then Marko6 stated in the thread he did not self-exclude because he thought he would not get paid if he did.
    The following is correct: I never saw a way to self-exclude which allowed me to receive my funds. Again, Anthony did not carefully read my posts and my emails. I wrote that I was AFRAID to lock my account, because that casino had made me believe that I would not get paid with a locked account. Is that so difficult to understand? Is my English that bad? I wish to read the chat (from the end of October 2012) again, in which the casino told me that lie. Why is neither Club Gold nor Anthony forwarding this chat to me??? Why did Anthony never address this very important point in his investigation??? Probably, because Club Gold Casino never forwarded this specific chat to him. I had sent several PMs to Anthony asking him, whether this specific chat was forwarded to him. Anthony did not reply to these PMs. I still do not know, whether Anthony has that chat log or not. I believe that I have the right to read this specific chat, because half of the text contained in it was written by me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
    I reviewed many of the logs. When Michael returns tomorrow, he will discuss Playtech’s review of them. From what I saw, the CGC timeline was always correct and CGC followed the players requests with the exception of changing the cashout limit.
    Exactly: "From what I saw". The problem is, that Anthony did not yet see all the chat logs. I do not know why, but my 2 principal questions are never answered. I even get the feeling that NOBODY CARES about an answer:

    QUESTION 1: WHAT COULD AN ADDICTED GAMBLER LIKE ME HAVE DONE TO GET ALL OF HIS FUNDS PAID, AFTER HE WAS TOLD BY CHAT THAT HE NEEDS AN UNLOCKED ACCOUNT TO GET PAID???

    QUESTION 2: WHAT COULD AN ADDICTED GAMBLER LIKE ME HAVE DONE TO GET ALL OF HIS FUNDS PAID, AFTER YOU DISABLED HIM TO PLAY ALL GAMES BUT SLOTS???

    Why is Anthony not addressing my severe accusation, that Club Gold Casino limited my gameplay to slots ON PURPOSE. Isn't it a very, VERY UNETHICAL behaviour, if a casinos limits a player's gameplay to slots to win back his funds as soon as possible? Why is this point never addressed by anyone??? Do you want other players to be tricked in the same way in the future?

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
    Marko6 clearly has a gambling problem.
    That is true. And I have taken care of that. I have self-excluded myself from all casinos, because I do know now, how this industry works: There might exist honorable casinos, but when playing at a casino you never know, whether your casino is honest or not. Club Gold Casino tricked me in so many ways, that gambling is just no fun anymore. I wished I could share that experience with all other players. Many of them would stay away from gambling. Club Gold Casino is not doing a good job for online gaming.

    Also, from my today's perspective I believe that Club Gold Casino must have been aware of my gambling problem in April 2013, at the latest. Is there any other player who sets session timers, monthly wagering limits and monthly deposit limits every single when he plays, and who asks for the removal of these limits the next day when he plays? I did not count how often I did that, but it must have been more than 20 or 30 times between January and March. The casino never asked me why I do that and whether I have a gambling problem. They were always pleased to remove the limits for me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
    Michael is handling it from here and will be back in the office tomorrow; my investigations in this case are concluded.
    I kindly ask Michael to take over. It makes me very, very sad to see, how fast some of you thank Anthony for his dubious results.

    marko6
    Last edited by marko6; 15 October 2013 at 12:40 am. Reason: Clarity

  27. #177
    DaftDog's Avatar
    DaftDog is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    October 2008
    Location
    Your kitchen.
    Posts
    2,060
    Thanks
    650
    Thanked 738 Times in 440 Posts

    Default

    mark06 it seems like you won't get help or be honest with yourself until you hit rock bottom.

  28. #178
    marko6's Avatar
    marko6 is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    August 2013
    Posts
    89
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 51 Times in 33 Posts

    Default

    A fair trial is a trial, in which all available proofs are examined. As explained in my previous post Anthony is slandering me with claims that I never made. 3 (out of 4) of his accusations are not true. True is that I never saw a way to self-exclude which allowed me to receive my funds. And where did I accuse Club Gold Casino of having changed my limits without my consent? I wrote that Club Gold Casino changed my limits, AND THAT IS TRUE, because the Playtech software does not allow a player to change limits himself with immediate effect. It was Club Gold Casino, who changed my limits upon my request by chat.

    But those limits are not the major point of my complaint, as the fault might indeed be with the software provider (Playtech should not enable the casino to change limits set by the player). The major THREE points of my complaint are, (1) that the casino made me believe that I need an open account to cash out, and (2) that the casino limited my gameplay to slots after realizing that I win too much, and (3) that it unlocked my account on May 19th, although I had requested an account lock until all funds have been paid.

    WHY IS ANTHONY NOT REQUESTING THE CHAT FROM OCTOBER 2012, IN WHICH CLUB GOLD CASINO WAS LYING TO ME (making me believe that I need an open account to cash out)???

    WHY IS ANTHONY NOT REQUESTING THE EMAIL, WHICH MADE THE CASINO LOCK MY ACCOUNT IN APRIL 2013 (in which I requested an account lock until all funds have been paid)???

    Anthony's investigation is one-sided (probably due to my faked email). Why do you give my faked email more weight than the casino's lie? How can it be, that the principal investigator of this issue does not ask for all available proofs? As I mentioned several times in this thread, those proofs must exist: How else could I have known that Club Gold chat operators tell their customers that they need an open account to cash out, as Leopold confirmed in his experiment (did you forget?)??? How else could I have known that the casino limits gameplay to specific games, as Selenemeltemp confirmed in his experience (did you forget?)??? And how else could the casino have locked my account, if it had not received an email from me requesting such an account lock??? This specific email contains a very important reason (that the casino limited my gameplay to slots), and it also contains a time frame for the account lock (I requested an account lock until all funds have been paid).

    HERE IS MY SUGGESTION: As in all democratic trials (if there were made formal mistakes) there will be a restart of the investigation with a new principal investigator. All available proofs are obtained. Any party having proofs but withholding them must give a reason, why it is withholding proofs. If there is no reason, then action is taken against that party.

    I will accept the final decision, once all avilable proofs have been examined. Playtech is able to pass on all chat logs, once Club Gold grants its authorisation.

    marko6
    Last edited by marko6; 15 October 2013 at 2:33 am. Reason: Clarity

  29. #179
    -Shay- is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    November 2012
    Posts
    3,062
    Thanks
    12,211
    Thanked 3,134 Times in 1,686 Posts

    Default

    Everything should surface one way or the other when Michael releases his commentary from Playtech. I said way back on day 1 that Playtech should be brought in. Now that they are, the issue can have closure in my opinion.

  30. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to -Shay- For This Useful Post:

    Anthony (15 October 2013), marko6 (15 October 2013)

  31. #180
    Roulette Zeitung is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    July 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    4,445
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks
    6,015
    Thanked 6,683 Times in 2,949 Posts

    Default

    Hello Marko,

    regardless, what you have done or not. You are a human and not a toy. I am very sorry and feel it is my duty to inform you, that you are now the the alibi, the scapegoat for ALL Club Gold issues:

    Read from here: https://www.gpwa.org/forum/vote-putt...tml#post735981

    This in not ok.

    Leopold

Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789101112 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •