Confiscation of P65/GE accounts
e...@get2net.dk
I had 1 account on P65: AlonsoLuis : balance: $7579, and 1 account on
Gammonempire: koule11: balance: €3982 In total: around €9638 or
$12915.
I play for stakes €10, €20, and €30 - and I admit that the balance had
become too high regarding normal safety principles - and this was the
reason that I on 18. march ordered a withdrawal of $5000 (max
withdrawal amount).
On 23. march I realized that both accounts had been closed without
explanation. I was informed it was due to "3. party program" use. I
appealed this decision, was asked to send 10 specific moneygames
against 9 different opponents - in these 10 games I had won 38 points
(probably less as the limit was reached in some of the games - this I
cant see in the log files). Anyway - the snowie 4 3-ply analysis of
these 10 games showed I played 7,0 on average.
Here is the answer I got on my appeal from GE:
---------------------------
Our management has found that in addition to the program aid use, your
account is associated with other accounts that all have the same
NETeller account.
That is against the site user agreement.
Our management has decided to keep your account closed.
All winnings were made void as you violated our site terms and
conditions.
You were refunded already the deposit amount and more than that.
Sincerely,
Paul A.
Assistant Manager
Customer Support
------------------------------------------
Regarding Neteller: I dont have any Neteller account. But I have a
rakeback arrangement with bgrake.com - and they deposit my rakeback
monthly to my P65 account via their Neteller account. This has
happened for more than 2 years, and usually the amount involved was
around $50/month.
I will gladly send the 10 files to anyone interested. Also I will
gladly provide any other information regarding this matter.
/Erik Sorensen
neilkaz
that Erik is being screwed here. I hope some of our BG colleagues can
help him out and hope that next time, it is one of them as a victim.
"1) You have a several year record of being a rather strong and
sucessful Danish player in live BG and expecting you to play money
games at a good ER seems normal.
2) They claim you cheated with a bot, which bot do they suspect and
how do they prove it ?
3) They should be the ones sending you Snowie analysed files of your
play to prove to you and the world that you almost certainly cheated
and they know it. Don't THEY maintain a record of your games played ?
3a) How stupid of them to ask YOU to send THEM 10 games. Obviously if
you were cheating you'd send them games where you played poorly and
didn't cheat. The fact they'd even ask YOU to send them games implies
that they either don't care whether you cheat or not, or don't keep a
log to catch suspected players. If you were suspected of cheating
wouldn't they have been monitoring your games, keeping logs, and be
able to nail you red-handed with absolute proof ?
4) 10 games at even 0.7 ER wouldn't be enough to prove anything
(although it would make me suspect and observe you further) 10 games
at an ER of 7 proves nothing. What is needed is for them to choose
about 100 random games at high stakes for you and run them thru a bot
for analysis. Said analysis will likely show that you won your points
bcuz you were luckier than your opps and they may have steamed and
blunder some serious equity as well.
5) You don't have a NetTeller acct. Can you prove it to them ? You've
been using bgrake instead and for two years, why do they have issue
now ? What a lame excuse for likely stealing nearly $13,000 that is
anyhow. Apparently because they now realize that there is no proof of
you bot cheating.
6) Have there been any claims/accusations from others that you bot
cheat ? If not, and you have been playing actively there for years, it
is EXTREMELY unlikely that you cheat. This should be blatantly obvious
to them.
7) By all means post your story at RGB which has a wide readership and
continue to go after GE/65 for your money.
8) Try to make an estimate of how much rake you've paid GE over the
years. Clearly it must be many thousands. You have been a good
customer to them and now they screw you with false claims ?
9) To me this matter STINKS of foul play. You try to withdraw some of
your large winnings (you are allowed to be lucky and outplay your
opps) and they use the typical "he bot cheats" excuse and when they
realize that won't work, they fabricate some lameass NetTeller BS.
10) Do what ever you can to have any Danish and Euro friends who play
lots at GE help you out and complain on your behalf. Clearly GE makes
lots of money because Danes play there ! Perhaps even the DBgF could
try to help you. Clearly GE would lose substantial revenue if your
Danish friends decided not to risk playing there anymore.
Best of Luck .. neilkaz ..."
Robi
http://www.gammonline.com/members/board/config.cgi?read=146412
<e...@get2net.dk> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1177668254....@r30g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
I was asked to post here my experience with P65/GE.
I had 1 account on P65: AlonsoLuis : balance: $7579, and 1 account on
Gammonempire: koule11: balance: ?3982 In total: around ?9638 or
$12915.
I play for stakes ?10, ?20, and ?30 - and I admit that the balance had
S
Raccoon
> Here is my reply posted at GoL. In summary it is my strong opinion
> that Erik is being screwed here.
Based on the facts that Erik has presented, that is my opinion too. As
far as I can see, Play65 has no evidence whatsoever that Erik has used
a third party program to help him play, and the issue of Neteller,
rakeback, whatever, is a complete red herring -- if Play65 has a
problem with one of its affiliates that is no excuse for confiscating
any player's balance.
I would hope that the Play65/GammonEmpire/Logicempire/Interlogic
backgammon "empire" will realize that reputable players and backgammon
organizations will not tolerate or associate with play sites where
what has apparently been done to Erik can happen. Barring the absence
of other relevant facts in this case, Play65 and its business
associates need to:
(1) return Erik Sørensen's money to him;
(2) explain to the backgammon community what they did wrong;
(2) explain to the backgammon community what steps they are taking to
ensure that similar instances won't be happening again.
Playsites and their customers have a legitimate interest in
identifying cheaters. Unfortunately it's not clear that Play65 or any
site actually has good methods in place to identify them. But
playsites desirous of a good reputation in the backgammon community
ought not to be confiscating players' money when the only thing those
players have done "wrong," as is apparently the case with Erik, is
win and ask to withdraw their winnings.
I'm looking forward to a prompt explanation and resolution of this
serious problem by Play65.
Raccoon aka Daniel Murphy
mont...@lycos.com
BG money sites.
Simon Woodhead
> I would hope that the Play65/GammonEmpire/Logicempire/Interlogic
> backgammon "empire" will realize that reputable players and backgammon
> organizations will not tolerate or associate with play sites where
> what has apparently been done to Erik can happen. Barring the absence
> of other relevant facts in this case, Play65 and its business
> associates need to:
I am normally skeptical of claims like this. Unfortunately I have
my own story to add which may suggest there is something serious
happening at GE...
Late last year I was approached by GammonEmpire, who wished to
advertise on the website I maintain for Sydney Backgammon:
http://www.sydbg.uniq.com.au/
I had previously negotiated and accepted advertising from Play65,
without an issue, so I didn't expect GE to behave dishonourably.
GammonEmpire agreed to an exclusive arrangement for a 12 month
period for which they would pay me a fixed monthly amount (we're
talking peanuts here; it's the principal that counts).
After just three months, they decided to pull the plug. Their
"excuse" was that they weren't getting referrals - there was
no requirement or agreement on my part to provide referrals,
however this was their only attempt at an excuse.
A cynical person may conclude that GE/LE/P65 or however they
call themselves are going through some serious difficulties.
If that is the case, I would hate to have a substantial amount
of money sitting in their coffers. Perhaps their customers
should consider reducing the amount of funds held there, for
fear that GE will find an excuse to, um, remove them.
I certainly will have nothing more to do with them and am
happy to tell people why.
[If you are a genuine, honest backgammon advertiser, I now
have some excellent advertising space available for you,
going cheap....]
Simon Woodhead
Sydney Backgammon
http://www.sydbg.uniq.com.au/
mont...@lycos.com
which are on the verge of dissolution?
geoffo
... Knee-capping !!!
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:58:57 +0100, S <s...@example.net> wrote:
> solve it the American way. SUE!
>
>
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Simon Woodhead
> solve it the American way. SUE!
Sue who ?
They are Barosh Ltd, a Tel Aviv, Israel company.
http://www.gammonaffiliates.com/affiliateAgreement.php
Let me know if you find a lawyer who will take them on...
T
"Simon Woodhead" <si...@uniq.com.au> wrote in message
news:133572b...@corp.supernews.com...
they can still be found. lawyer or no lawyer.
when they wind up on the bottom of some river, they'll learn not to scam
people.
T
employees include:
Matari Offer
Nahum Mizrahi
acep...@googlemail.com
> I am normally skeptical of claims like this. Unfortunately I have
> my own story to add which may suggest there is something serious
> happening at GE...
>
> Late last year I was approached by GammonEmpire, who wished to
> advertise on the website I maintain for Sydney Backgammon:http://www.sydbg.uniq.com.au/
>
> I had previously negotiated and accepted advertising from Play65,
> without an issue, so I didn't expect GE to behave dishonourably.
>
> GammonEmpire agreed to an exclusive arrangement for a 12 month
> period for which they would pay me a fixed monthly amount (we're
> talking peanuts here; it's the principal that counts).
>
> After just three months, they decided to pull the plug. Their
> "excuse" was that they weren't getting referrals - there was
> no requirement or agreement on my part to provide referrals,
> however this was their only attempt at an excuse.
We at "www.gnubg.org" got similar offers regarding our webpage (from
buying it to banners and other advertising). Glad we never accepted
any offers.
Ciao
acepoint
benri...@hotmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hello to you all.
My name is Ben and i represent GammonEmpire.
Here are my answers to some of the complaints discussed here:
1. closing accounts: GammonEmpire is obligated to protect it's
player's interestes. when we track a suspicious account we track it
for a while to see if the player is really cheating or if it is just a
one off mishap. this is the reason the account wasnt blocked
immediately. The account discussed here violated few rules mentioned
in our player agreement. the most important ones are using a third
party software and using joint neteller account. there are over
3,000,000 registered members in our database. if your claims are
correct how come we get so little complaints regarding such matters.
in all my years with GE this is the second time i get such complaint.
the first one, BTW resolved in reopenning a player account after he
proved us he did not use third party software. You can rest assure
that GammonEmpire's and play65 financial status has never been better
and the reason we're blocking suspicious accounts is not because of
our "poor" condition as some of you claim but rather to protect
millions of other players who play by the rules.How do you explain
your use of joint neteller account Eric? I'm sure you are well aware
that rakeback is not allowed on GE or play65......
2. Simon Woodhead: I think that before you post such complaints you
should contact me to see whats going on with the payment. The payment
has actually been transferred this morning. As you know, we run a
business here. do you really think that i should continue a campaign
on your site for 12 months while it generate no results what so
ever?........ I'll give you an example: imagine being contacted by
FOXTEL (Australia's cable network). they offer you this amazing
promtion, giving you 150 channels for a certain amount in return for a
12 months obligation on your side. once you sign the agreement you
find out that you got only 2 channels. will you still keep paying
them?...... you say that you're not responsible to the results
genrated with this campaign. i will gladly send you the mail you wrote
that guarntees me a small but highly quality traffic? (that means, at
least one player in three months dont you think?)....... despite of
all that i was willing to continue the campaign for two more months
until you find another publisher. you asked for three more months. i
gladly accepted that and transferred you the money. I'm very
disappointed that you decided to continue our business relationship
over the internet and not in private as serious people do. beside you
we have thousands of other satisfied business partners. We never
failed in paying what we owe.
3. GnuBG: I think that before posting such comment you should tell
people the whole story. i have no interest in opening a discussion
with you over the internet but i'm sure you know what i mean..... BTW
how are you doing Achim?
4. GE, along with Play65 is the world's biggest backgammon server.
there are good reasons for it. obviously when you run a business who
provide services to over 3,000,000 backgammon players around the world
there will be some unsatisfied customers. that is totally acceptable
and logic. Altough it is not my job to solve player's complaints as
i'm in charge of our business partners i will gladly help as much as i
can. I'm sure you agree with me that a business can not survive unless
he provides his cutomers with fair, fast quality service. GE and Play
65 has been online for more than 2.5 years. in this short time we
acquired more than 3,000,000 backgammon players. many of them play for
money. we laready gave back our players millions of dollars. i think
that these facts cover it all.
have a great week everyone.
MK
> Anyone have a good idea about which money BG sites are doing well, and
> which are on the verge of dissolution?
PartyGammon.com is running the biggest weekly backgammon prize pool
with $10,000 Guaranteed every Sunday. The backgammon room from
PartyPoker.com The world's leading listed online gaming company. The
affiliates program paid out over $100 million in 2006 to Marketing
Partners. Unfortunately they don't accept US players due to the
Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006
Simon Woodhead
> 2. Simon Woodhead: I think that before you post such complaints you
Sigh. As if I'd make that post without appropriate evidence.
> should contact me to see whats going on with the payment. The payment
> has actually been transferred this morning. As you know, we run a
Lol. A bit late, Ben. [I have asked Ben *not* to transfer any
payment to me, and to date, none has appeared]
> business here. do you really think that i should continue a campaign
> on your site for 12 months while it generate no results what so
> ever?........
I made it very clear to you right from the start that I had no
interest in your affiliate arrangement and would accept upfront,
paid advertising only.
> I'll give you an example: imagine being contacted by
> FOXTEL (Australia's cable network). they offer you this amazing
> promtion, giving you 150 channels for a certain amount in return for a
> 12 months obligation on your side. once you sign the agreement you
> find out that you got only 2 channels. will you still keep paying
> them?...... you say that you're not responsible to the results
Yeah, well, I'm not Foxtel and I didn't agree to refer any
traffic to you.
> genrated with this campaign. i will gladly send you the mail you wrote
> that guarntees me a small but highly quality traffic? (that means, at
> least one player in three months dont you think?)....... despite of
Ben, show me where I agreed to refer *any* players to you, be
they fun, real or whatever you want to call them. I have every
mail I ever sent you, so I look forward to your evidence. Here
is what I told you on Dec 27 06:
"I will accept prepaid advertising, in exactly the same manner as
I do now with Play65, ie cash up front for one year exclusive."
To which you replied:
"I'm willing to commit for 12 month if the deal is exclusive."
In finalising the arrangement, I signed up to your affiliate agreement
which does *not* set any quotas for referrals. I also (stupidly in
hindsight) agreed to monthly payments. I should have been suspicious
then - after all your sister company, Play65, were more than happy
to pay me up front.
> all that i was willing to continue the campaign for two more months
> until you find another publisher. you asked for three more months. i
> gladly accepted that and transferred you the money. I'm very
Bzzzzzt. Completely wrong here, Ben. I can show you my Paypal
records that prove you have not sent me any payment since your
third of the agreed twelve on Mar 20. The last email I sent to
you requested that you agree to another three months; that was
on 10th April. I've heard nothing since so I reasonably assumed
you had nothing to say or offer. I waited until after the date
of your regular payment (18th of the month) and after no payment
or email appeared, I pulled your banners from the site.
> disappointed that you decided to continue our business relationship
> over the internet and not in private as serious people do. beside you
> we have thousands of other satisfied business partners. We never
> failed in paying what we owe.
I have every mail you sent, and every mail I sent. I'm glad
you have "thousands" of satisfied business partners. I am not
one of them.
Patti Beadles
<benri...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>the first one, BTW resolved in reopenning a player account after he
>proved us he did not use third party software.
So in essence, you can close the account of anyone at any time
by claiming that they are using third-party software. When that
happens, the victim must then somehow prove to you that they
have not used such software? And you, the company that stands
to profit from funds confiscation, will be the final arbiter of
whether or no they have proven the unsubstantiated allegation?
Thank you for clarifying that. It gives me (a potential
customer) tremendous information in choosing where to play.
>4. GE, along with Play65 is the world's biggest backgammon server.
>there are good reasons for it.
Marketing.
PartyPoker was by far the largest online poker room, but it was
most certainly *not* the best.
-Patti
--
Patti Beadles, Oakland, CA |
pattib~pattib.org | All religions are equally
http://www.pattib.org/ | ludicrous, and should be ridiculed
Check out www.tribe.net ! | as often as possible. C. Bond
robadams
> Hello to you all.
>
> My name is Ben and i represent GammonEmpire.
>
> Here are my answers
.....
i think that these facts cover it all.
>
How could you possibly think that covers everything? You accused Erik
S. of using 3rd party software to cheat at backgammon on your site.
In your response here, you gave no evidence that he did so.
It's a separate issue, but if you have a problem with your own
affiliate offering rakebacks, you should tell them and stop paying
them. Far more players than just this one use that affiliate I'm
sure. Are you going to confiscate all of their money too?
acep...@googlemail.com
> people the whole story. i have no interest in opening a discussion
> with you over the internet but i'm sure you know what i mean..... BTW
> how are you doing Achim?
Fine, tx, and you?
Ok, here is the whole story regarding GE: we once agreed on linking GE
on our webpage for xxx$ a month (one banner). After one month GE
started negotiating again dumping the price, they didn't pay and we
cancelled the deal. If you need details ask Assaf for the e-mails. I
also have saved everything here (just in case).
Regarding the "Eric Sorensen" story I only can say that the behaviour
of GE isn't professional at all. The reasons are already mentioned
here on r.g.b. and gammonline.
Ciao
acepoint
Raccoon
> Hello to you all.
>
> My name is Ben and i represent GammonEmpire.
Hello Ben Nolastname. In your comments, you seem to represent both
GammonEmpire and Play65. You claim to know details of both
corporation's financials, their methods of tracking accounts, their
rules and enforcement policies. But if you represent only
GammonEmpire, how can you help solve Erik's problem with both
GammonEmpire and Play65?
> Here are my answers to some of the complaints discussed here:
Your response, Ben, raises more questions than answers them. Did you
read Erik Sorensen's post? And Neil Kazaross'? And mine?
> 1. closing accounts: GammonEmpire is obligated to protect it's
> player's interestes. when we track a suspicious account we track it
> for a while to see if the player is really cheating or if it is just a
> one off mishap. this is the reason the account wasnt blocked
> immediately.
Erik says he's been playing on Play65 and GE for two years. The
impetus for the sudden suspicion concerning Erik's play seems to be
his request to make a large withdrawal. When did you become suspicious
of his play? How long did you monitor his play? What methods did you
use to monitor his play? Why -- _after_ you had told Erik he was a
cheat -- did _you_ have to ask _him_ to send you copies of match logs?
Whatever could that prove? Don't you have keep them? If not, however
do ever catch anybody cheating?
Neil and I raised some of these same questions already, Ben, and since
you didn't answer them, that's why I asked if you'd actually read what
we had written.
> The account discussed here violated few rules mentioned
> in our player agreement. the most important ones are using a third
> party software and using joint neteller account.
What proof do you have that he used a "third party software"? Which
one was it? When did he use it? How did it help him?
What does "using joint neteller account" have to do with anything?
> there are over
> 3,000,000 registered members in our database. if your claims are
> correct how come we get so little complaints regarding such matters.
Let's not confuse registered members with actual members, even if
3,000,000 acccounts have been registered, but anyway ...
> in all my years with GE this is the second time i get such complaint.
What does that mean? That only twice has GE confiscated a players'
account? If so, sir, I suggest to you that either your methods of
catching cheaters or your enforcement of your rules are very poor to
have caught and punished only two cheaters out of 3,000,000. By the
way, "In all my years with GE" is how many years? As you point out
below, GE has only been in business for two and one-half years.
> the first one, BTW resolved in reopenning a player account after he
> proved us he did not use third party software.
Perhaps you meant to say that he demonstrated to someone's
satisfaction that his account ought not to be closed. But how was it
possible for this player you mention to "prove" that he had not used a
bot while playing online? This is not a hypothetical question, Ben.
Suppose I were to start playing at Play65 from the privacy of my own
home and you accused me of using a bot and confiscate my winnings. How
could I possibly "prove" that I hadn't?
> How do you explain your use of joint neteller account Eric?
Well, Ben, how do _you_ explain it? And what exactly is the problem?
Apparently, it has something to do with the fact that Erik gets
rakeback from bgrake.com for his play on Play65. Bgrake.com uses a
Neteller account to distribute directly to Play65 player accounts a
percentage of the rakeback that Play65 gives to its affiliatte
Bgrake.com Is that not correct?
> I'm sure you are well aware that rakeback is not allowed on GE or play65......
Why would anyone be "well aware" of this rule? "Your" websites have
pages with rules listing restricted activities.
http://www.gammonempire.com/backgammon.php
http://www.play65.com/Backgammon.html
Please point to the rule that says rakeback is not allowed. It's not
there, Ben.
If you mean that Play65 does not allow its AFFILIATES to give
rakeback, well then Play65 has an obvious solution -- cancel its
affiliate agreement with affiliates that give rakeback! But what has
this do with the players? Erik says he has been receiving rakeback for
two years, through regular payments via this "joint neteller account"
you suddenly find so suspicious. Why is this suddenly a problem?
Explain the logic of:
You're getting rakeback,
which is not a restricted activity,
so we're confiscating your money
> Altough it is not my job to solve player's complaints as
> i'm in charge of our business partners i will gladly help as much as i
> can.
Perhaps, Ben, you could help by suggesting that we hear from someone
whose job it actually is to solve players' complaints.
> I'm sure you agree with me that a business can not survive unless
> he provides his cutomers with fair, fast quality service.
That is the strategy of many businesses. Others follow other
strategies which often work extremely well for a while. Marketing
helps.
> i think that these facts cover it all.
Hardly.
(1) You and the company(ies) you represent have presented neither to
Erik nor to anyone else any proof that Erik used a "third-party
program" to help him play.
(2) Your statement that rakeback is not allowed is contradicted by the
fact that your websites' lists of restricted activities do not mention
rakeback.
(3) Your statement about there only being one similar complaints in
the past raises doubts that you have effective methods to identify
cheaters.
(4) Your companies' correspondence with Erik suggests that "you" feel
free to confiscate a player's money at any time for any reason without
the slightest compulsion to provide that player any notification or
any proof whatsoever of your accusations.
Let's assume, Ben, that Play65/GammonEmpire/Barosh/Interlogic/
Logicempire does indeed wish to provide "fast, fair, quality service."
Let me suggest to you that so far in this particular matter you not
meeting that goal. I wonder when we can expect to hear someone who
represents BOTH Play65 and GammonEmpire
AND who can solve and resolve customer complaints, including Erik's
AND who can provide proof of Play65/GE's charges against Erik
AND who can answer questions about your cheat detecting ability
AND who can explain what rakeback has to do with anything.
/Raccoon
Robi
"Raccoon" <racg...@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1177963181.9...@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
D Kinston
of reasons, some unrelated to backgammon.
Obviously there will always be issues, always people trying to
'beat the system', and no policy can satisfy everyone.
I feel that any site doing this must at least do the following:
1 Publicly provide justification for any sanctions imposed.
2 Provide avenues for appeal, using a reputable mutually
agreed arbiter, with the whole process transparent.
3 Not benefit directly - this is most important.
Any funds confiscated should be returned to players.
There are many way to do this - eg special tournaments
with augmented prizemoney and heavily discounted entry
to active players esp the 'victims' of the 'cheats'.
Then there will be far fewer complaints.
David Kinston
melbourne.au
www.melBG.org
Michael Petch
Since you make claims about others and then ask them to defend themselves
and prove otherwise - I have a small question for you.
Can you prove that your weekly meetings don't go something like this:
Management: "I need to buy a new Porsche"
Employee: "How much do you need this week?"
Management: "We are setting individual staff Quotas at 30,000 USD"
Employee: "That shouldn't be a problem our staff average about 35k/each
last week"
Management: "Yes, we were all proud of you - finally paid off the yacht!"
Employee: "Its really an easy task - closing out high balance accounts
where someone is withdrawing is like shooting fish in a barrel, with no way
for them to really prove it!"
Management: "And our players think we make all the money on the rakes!!"
Employee: "Yes, a lot of dumb fish in that barrel"
Management: "Yes, and we hope they stay that way"
PS: Enron was a successful company at one time too.
neilkaz
Are you really the best that GE can come up with to reply here ? I'm
mean truly pathetic corporate BS..so much so that you should be truly
ashamed. You work for what you think is the premier online BG server
and all you can use is a hotmail email address ? Well that isn't my
point but it adds to the lameness off your reply.
Who cares whether Erik used rakeback or not ? The fact that he did
harms noone, and certainly not GE or your other users.
Does GE need $13,000 so badly that they need to find a lame reason to
steal from a loyal customer like Erik who obviously has payed you
thousands of dollars in rake ?
Please PROVE he used a bot to cheat, what bot was it, how do you prove
it ?
In my opinion, GE lacks the capability to prove bot cheating and most
certainly lacks the BG expertise. I have the BG expertise..and guess
what I'll volunteer to do here and in public ?!?
Yep..Ben..or whom ever you are ..if you give Erik all his stolen money
back (unless you can prove to me he really did cheated by showing me
many match logs) I'll volunteer my time, for free (for the betterment
of my beloved game) to help you set up methods to first suspect bot
cheaters and to then catch them.
Please GE..do the right thing and give Erik his money back and then
set up reliable methods to catch those who really do cheat (and there
are many who you don't come close to catching)
.. neilkaz ..
Havard Raddum
>
> Here is the answer I got on my appeal from GE:
>
> ---------------------------
>
> Our management has found that in addition to the program aid use, your
> account is associated with other accounts that all have the same
> NETeller account.
>
> That is against the site user agreement.
>
> Our management has decided to keep your account closed.
>
> All winnings were made void as you violated our site terms and
> conditions.
>
> You were refunded already the deposit amount and more than that.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Paul A.
>
> Assistant Manager
>
> Customer Support
>
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Regarding Neteller: I dont have any Neteller account. But I have a
> rakeback arrangement with bgrake.com - and they deposit my rakeback
> monthly to my P65 account via their Neteller account. This has
> happened for more than 2 years, and usually the amount involved was
> around $50/month.
>
> I will gladly send the 10 files to anyone interested. Also I will
> gladly provide any other information regarding this matter.
>
> /Erik Sorensen
>
I have read the postings here about the unlucky Erik, and have only
briefly heard about 'rakeback' before. I had problems (and it seems I'm
not alone) understanding the 'one Neteller account, multiple P65
accounts' argument that Erik received in the email. I went to look at
www.bgrake.com to see what it's all about. Quotes from their FAQ:
------------------- begin quote -----------------------
How do you know how much rake I have generated?
That is very easy for us to find out, because Play65 provides us with
this information. We receive a report on how much rake each and every
one of our referred players generates. Then we can quickly figure out
how much of this rake we owe you.
------------------- end quote ----------------------------
OK, so Play65 and whoever is behind bgrake.com have a close
collaboration, with Play65 sending details of the activity of users to
bgrake.com. Next FAQ quote:
----------------- begin quote ----------------------------
When will I get my rake back?
You will be paid on or before the 15th day of every month, for the
previous calendar month's play.
There are some payment options. Payments can be transferred into your
Neteller account or directly into your Play65 account.
------------------- end quote -------------------------------
So bgrake.com is SUPPOSED to be able to transfer money into a player's
Play65 account. Play65 has to be cooperating to make these transfers
happen (or is it possible for me to stuff money into some random
player's Play65 account on my own? Don't know, haven't tried). The
question is then: How can Play65 act surprised when it finds one
Neteller account (the one owned by bgrake.com) has funded several Play65
accounts? Isn't this part of the deal between bgrake.com and Play65? I
wonder if Ben dares stick his head out again and try to answer...
e...@get2net.dk
7.35 DK-time this morning I received this email from
sup...@play65.co.il :
Hello,
We've sorted this matter with bgrake, your account is now open and you
are free
to use it.
Please note that using BG software while playing is not allowed and we
will keep
track on your games from now.
Sincerely,
Jerry
Customer Support Manager.
---
My accounts with the full balances have been given back to me. With
this statement
the case has reached the end from my perspective. If others want to
insist it is up
to them.
Still let me express my deep respect and gratitude to all that have
supported me and
shown interest in reaching a solution.
/Erik
Raccoon
> The latest development in this case.
> 7.35 DK-time this morning I received this email from
>
> Hello,
>
> We've sorted this matter with bgrake, your account is now open and you
> are free
> to use it.
>
> Please note that using BG software while playing is not allowed and we
> will keep
> track on your games from now.
>
> Sincerely,
> Jerry
> Customer Support Manager.
>
> ---
> My accounts with the full balances have been given back to me. With
> this statement
> the case has reached the end from my perspective. If others want to
> insist it is up
> to them.
>
> Still let me express my deep respect and gratitude to all that have
> supported me and
> shown interest in reaching a solution.
You're welcome. I'm glad you finally got your own money back and your
account reopened. But you got no explanation and, astoundingly, no
apology, for Play65/GE/Logicempire's Philip, Ben and Jerry's utterly
incompetent handling of this problem. And we have no assurance that
this company will handle the next case any better.
GammonEmpire
>
> - Show quoted text -
How else do you want us to handle cases? maybe we should have kept
erik account blocked..... as you're not running a business who
provide services to millions of people, you have no idea how many
people try to cheat, steal and lie. we have no choice but to use
extreme methods to try and prevent these kind of caes. from time to
time innocent players get hurt by it. But, as you can see we exmaine
every case and if we find out that we were wrong we have no problem
admitting it. maybe you all prefer that play65 or ge will simply
refund or reopen every account that has ever been blocked just because
it created some discomfort to some players. i congrutulate erik for
getting his money back. i want to remid you all that im not hiding
behind any fake email addresses or false names as some of you stated.
you are all welcome to contact me with any problems you have
Raccoon
ROFLMAO, benric...@gmail.com. That paragraph is such ass-holish
garbage I have difficulty believing it really comes from anyone who
gets paid to drum up business for GammonEmpire.
> How else do you want us to handle cases?
With competence, grace and efficiency. Using legitimate corporate
email accounts. Unfortunately for GammonEmpire, a google search for
"Marketing VP" Richter indicates that he does in fact work for them.
Unbelievable if true.
Robi
<e...@get2net.dk> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1178014324.7...@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Kees van den Doel
GammonEmpire <benric...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> You're welcome. I'm glad you finally got your own money back and your
>> account reopened. But you got no explanation and, astoundingly, no
>> apology, for Play65/GE/Logicempire's Philip, Ben and Jerry's utterly
>> incompetent handling of this problem. And we have no assurance that
>> this company will handle the next case any better.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>How else do you want us to handle cases? maybe we should have kept
>erik account blocked..... as you're not running a business who
>provide services to millions of people, you have no idea how many
>people try to cheat, steal and lie. we have no choice but to use
>extreme methods to try and prevent these kind of caes. from time to
>time innocent players get hurt by it. But, as you can see we exmaine
>every case and if we find out that we were wrong we have no problem
>admitting it. maybe you all prefer that play65 or ge will simply
>refund or reopen every account that has ever been blocked just because
>it created some discomfort to some players. i congrutulate erik for
>getting his money back. i want to remid you all that im not hiding
>behind any fake email addresses or false names as some of you stated.
>you are all welcome to contact me with any problems you have
Anyone who trusts a spammailtalker like that with his money deserves to
get burned I'd say.
Kees (Joy to crotspam to 60 million deaf banana palm trees like you
Finnish Ma rakastan sinua a in overdekt gebruiken, graag.)
neilkaz
right decision by returning Erik's funds.
The fact that this whole incident occured is very unsettling to say
the least.
GE really needs to have better controls to make sure that some
overzealous employees don't falsely accuse big winners of cheating and
come up with lame excuses about NetTeller, when GE has arrangements
with rakebacks !
Those of us who can play on GE, certainly want them to be able to
monitor and catch suspected bot cheaters. I feel a whole lot better
about gambling on servers when I am pretty darn sure I am not playing
a bot, as do most of the rest of you.
Seriously, GE...how bloody difficult can it be for you to have a bot
like GNU scan the match logs of big winners, high rated players, and
those whom customers have complained about? You won't catch everyone
who uses a bot occasionally to help with a move or two, and you may
even end up with strong suspicisions about a couple of really strong
players who don't cheat. However, this is far superior to what seems
to be the current system...that goes something like this..."Hmm...he
wants to withdraw LOTS of money...OK he must have cheated to win it,
so we will accuse him of cheating with no evidence and then still make
his life miserable and hold his money a couple more weeks after he
proves innocence."
GE really needs to get a clue..thank god for places like PG etc
etc ... neilkaz ..
robadams
>
> "How else do you want us to handle cases? "
That's a good question. Thanks for asking it. Many people have
provided some answers above and below in this thread. But briefly, I
want you to run an honest business, be honest with your customers and
the public, monitor all of the games played on your site for evidence
of people cheating with a bot, keep records of those games so that you
have evidence if you need to accuse someone of cheating in the future,
and ban those found to be cheating including publishing their
usernames and as much information about their real identities that you
know on public forums like this one and the GammOnLine forum that you
now own.
"maybe we should have kept erik account blocked..... "
Absolutely. You accused him of cheating with a third-party program.
I privately emailed you about it and you said you were right and he
was cheating and that you would prove it on GammOnLine. If he was
cheating you definitely should keep his account blocked. If you can't
prove it, you should probably pay him, but if you have good reason to
suspect him of cheating, you should keep his account blocked/closed.
"as you're not running a business who
> provide services to millions of people, you have no idea how many
> people try to cheat, steal and lie. "
I think people are willing to admit that some gamblers cheat, steal,
and lie. If you say it is a large percentage of your clients, OK, I
think it's a small percentage, but it's your business... you don't
give any indication of what percentage here, so of course I have no
idea as you haven't shared it.
"we have no choice but to use
> extreme methods to try and prevent these kind of caes. from time to
> time innocent players get hurt by it. "
What? Confiscating the accounts of cheaters isn't extreme. Don't
apologize for that. But innocent people shouldn't get hurt by it.
That's where you are losing me and I think other people. Why did you
accuse Erik of cheating? That's a very serious charge especially to a
well known real life over-the-board player. And, if you did suspect
him of cheating, why didn't you accuse him and close his account
BEFORE he tried to cash out. As it is, it looks like you just wanted
to avoid paying, not that you really cared if he were cheating or not.
"But, as you can see we exmaine
> every case and if we find out that we were wrong we have no problem
> admitting it. "
I don't see that. It looks to me like you examined it only because of
the pressure from people like Raccoon posting Erik's situation on the
GammOnLine bulletin board and the repeated complaints/emails you
received from people who read these boards. Have you admitted you
were wrong here? Did Erik cheat?
"maybe you all prefer that play65 or ge will simply
> refund or reopen every account that has ever been blocked just because
> it created some discomfort to some players. "
No. I'd prefer that you are honest. I'd prefer that you make a
serious attempt to identify players who use bots to cheat with and
when you do identify them, you publish their usernames and real
identities to forums like this and GammOnLine and share that with all
other online backgammon sites. The problem isn't about causing
discomfort, it's about your online backgammon site being clueless
about who is cheating and who isn't and the manner in which you
confiscate people's accounts ONLY when they go to cash out. So,
assuming they were a cheater, you let them continue playing on your
site as long as they wanted, cheating other players out of their
money, until the time that they try to cash out.
"i congrutulate erik for
> getting his money back. "
What do you mean by this? He had given up hope of being paid after
you told him that his appeals were denied. It is only because of
Raccoon's post on GammOnLine that he got his money back. You stole
from Erik and got caught. Now that you've returned the money are we
supposed to forgive you? Have you even apologized?
i want to remid you all that im not hiding
> behind any fake email addresses or false names as some of you stated.
> you are all welcome to contact me with any problems you have
Well, ok then, who owns gammonempire and who owns play65 and why do
you think you can continue to do business when you steal from your
customers?
robadams
earlier on this thread:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello to you all.
My name is Ben and i represent GammonEmpire.
Here are my answers to some of the complaints discussed here:
1. closing accounts: GammonEmpire is obligated to protect it's
player's interestes. when we track a suspicious account we track it
for a while to see if the player is really cheating or if it is just a
one off mishap. this is the reason the account wasnt blocked
immediately. The account discussed here violated few rules mentioned
in our player agreement. the most important ones are using a third
party software
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This sounds reasonable. You suspect someone of cheating and you
monitor their play for a while, and then when you are convinced they
are cheating regularly on your site, you close their account and
confiscate their money. No problems here.
But, the issue is, it doesn't appear to be true.
So, I'm asking you to clarify. Did Erik S. use third-party software
to cheat with while playing on your site? Did you first suspect him
of cheating and then track his playing habits for a while coming up
with even more evidence of cheating with third-party software, and
then and only then block his account? Because to me, it looks like
that isn't true. It looks like you didn't notice him at all until he
went to make a withdrawl. And, since you've now un-blocked his
account and returned his money, it appears you now believe he didn't
cheat with third-party software? Or do you still believe that, but
are allowing a known cheater to continue to play on your site?
Your actions in this case AND your posts here on rec.games.backgammon
make you appear dishonest. It appears you simply stole his money and
then when caught returned it. It appears you made baseless
allegations of cheating with third-party software against a well known
real life over-the-board player.
Tell me I'm wrong. Explain what happened in this case and how you
plan to deal with players cheating with gnubg and/or other bots on
your site in the future. I'd love to hear it. In an email reply to
me you said you would prove that Erik cheated on the GammOnLine
forum. To date, you haven't posted there at all. And your posts here
on rec.games.backgammon have not only not proven that he cheated, you
haven't even shown any evidence or reason to suspect him of cheating.
robadams
> Your actions in this case AND your posts here on rec.games.backgammon
> make you appear dishonest. It appears you simply stole his money and
> then when caught returned it. It appears you made baseless
> allegations of cheating with third-party software against a well known
> real life over-the-board player.
>
You stole his money play65/gammonempire. You accused him of cheating
in order to try to get away with it.
Do you have no response? Why do you think you should be able to go on
doing business this way?
Ragnar
are there that were robed by GE and didn't mention anything about it
on any forum. Who knows? For me this whole story means only one thing:
Do not play there. If it happend to Erik it can happen to me, with
only a slight difference, if I loose couple hundred of dollars I will
be on my own, nobody will fight for me getting it back :)
ri...@notyahoo.com
wrote:
>How else do you want us to handle cases? maybe we should have kept
>erik account blocked..
Looks like you did just that, Ben.
Rich
--------------------------------------------------------------------
=======================================================================
=======================================================================
"I don't have the least interest in verifying my theory because I have
already adopted it as correct to myself, from both a logical and
practical standpoint." - Grunty