Ve? sam vam objasnio za?to ne mo?emo da zatvorimo slu?aj sa statusnim publicitetom. Me?utim, objasni?u to jo? jednom: kada smo istra?ivali va? slu?aj, otkrili smo da ste igrali sa bonusom namenjenim za slotove na BJ. Kao rezultat, stekli ste prednost i iz tog razloga smo odlu?ili da podr?imo kazino.
Tako?e, uzmite u obzir i ovo:
komentar od Brajana (aka Casinomeister) privatno:
?Upravo sam proverio i mo?da ste nas pogre?no razumeli. Ovu odluku nije doneo kazino, ve? dobavlja? softvera. Dakle, ako ni?ta drugo - vi biste imali potra?ivanje protiv njih, a ne od kazina. Menad?ment kazina je samo potvrdio odluku koju je doneo dobavlja? softvera. Dakle, ako ni?ta drugo, trebalo bi da re?ite svoj problem sa njima.'
Razmotrite situaciju iz perspektive kazina:
Ako je igra? podneo zahtev, ali va?e bezbednosno odeljenje, provajder igre i posrednik potvrde da ste u pravu i da je igra? prekr?io pravila, da li biste i dalje platili?
Kada kazino veruje da se pona?a ispravno, a ?ak smo i mi verovali u to, ne mo?ete ih kriviti za to. Klasifikacija publiciteta je korisna u slu?ajevima kada je kazino postupio pogre?no. Oni su najverovatnije znali za to, a tek nakon ?to je slu?aj javno predstavljen, kazino je odlu?io da na kraju plati. U ovim slu?ajevima smo na strani igra?a od samog po?etka jer je o?igledno da je kazino uradio ne?to pogre?no.
Molim vas nemojte me pogre?no shvatiti. Veoma sam sre?an ?to ste dobili slu?aj. Mnogi slu?ajevi nisu crno-beli, i jo? uvek me veoma zanima ?ta je ubedilo sud i kazino da vam na kraju plate. Kada smo izra?unali (nisam samo ja radio na ovom slu?aju), slu?aj nam je bio jasan. Zato bih ?eleo da znam ?ta smo propustili ili ?ta nije u redu.
I've already explained to you why we can't close the case with the status publicity helped. However, I will explain it once more: When we were investigating your case, we found that you played with a bonus intended for slots on BJ. As a result, you gained an advantage, and for that reason, we decided to support the casino.
Also, please consider this:
comment from Bryan (aka Casinomeister) in private:
'I just checked and you may have misunderstood us. It's not the casino that made this decision, but the software provider. So if anything - you would have a claim against them, not the casino. The casino management just upheld the decision made by the software provider. So if anything, you should take your issue up with them.'
Consider the situation from a casino's perspective:
If the player has filed a claim but your security department, game provider and mediator confirm that you are in the right and the player has violated the rules, would you still pay?
When a casino believed it is acting correctly, and even we believed so, you can't blame them for that. The classification of publicity is helpful in cases where the casino acted wrongly. They most likely knew about it, and only after the case was publicly presented did the casino decide to eventually pay. In these cases we are on the player's side since the begginig becuase it is obvious that the casino did something wrong.
Please don't get me wrong. I am very happy that you won the case. Many cases are not black and white, and I am still very interested in what convinced the court and casino to pay you eventually. When we did the math (not only I was working on this case), the case was clear to us. Therefore, I would like to know what we missed or what was wrong.
Automatski prevedeno:
