Quote from: CL-Ed on August 09, 2016, 01:33:29 AM

Quote

Betsoft did not have a history of not paying. They provided some of the most innovative slots in the industry and they have been a respected brand within the gaming community. There has not been a history of Betsoft defaulting on it's obligations.

Why do shills for this company keep repeating this garbage about their "innovative" games and their "respect" within the industry and alluding to how they are such a big player etc? Its the most transparent and obvious marketing schtick and it is completely revisionist and false.

They are not the big player that they want everyone to believe they are. The major forces in this industry are the likes of Microgaming, Net Entertainment, Playtech (sadly), Novomatic, IGT and others. Betsoft are a bit part player at best, mostly used either by cheap casinos that don't have the funds to license the best software, or ones that want to accept American players that the major industry providers won't go near.

You want to talk about Betsoft's history? How about the time in 2010 when they were busted running a rigged Keno game? Or the time in 2014 when Alderney revoked their license to operate? Or the 9 month investigation that we did that revealed that they do in fact "have a history of not paying", specifically with unwinnable progressive jackpots. Those are facts, not marketing drivel.

Quote

I agree, if a website did send people to a third party that has a history of not paying out their obligations when they should, then I think that you would be justified in believing they are a scam.

Great, seeing as I have demonstrated this then you do agree that they are scammers.

Quote

I brought up the case above to point out how outsourcing the progressive jackpots work; it's the only way to provide such large jackpots to the consumer.

That may be the case if we were talking about a networked progressive that is shared amongst casinos. But we aren't. The jackpot that Jason was robbed of was specific to Betcoin. No other casino. So no, you're completely wrong when you say "it's the only way to provide such large jackpots to the consumer" because clearly, it isn't.

Quote

I might add that Betsoft is among the largest players in the online gaming industry; in fact, even casinolistings.com, which brought up the statistical claims against Betsoft, Bovada, and slots.lv, is reluctant to put them on their own blacklist until all the evidence is evaluated.

Wrong and wrong again. Did you even read what you linked to where I said "while we haven't written them up yet on the blacklist page, they are definitely going on there in short order"? Our blacklist page features Betsoft (and Betcoin too).

Quote

Furthermore, casinolistings has a problem with ANY purely cryptocurrency based casino and none of the purely cryptocurrency based casinos found on this forum would meet their standards.

This is again incorrect. We have a problem with unlicensed and unregulated casinos. The fact that almost all crypto casinos meet that definition probably leads to your misinterpretation. We like provably fair games and Bitcoin as a payment method is quick and cheap. Its great. But when the casino is not accountable to anyone and can just disappear overnight then I would not recommend playing there for the same reason I would not store BTC in an online wallet or exchange.

So, you do have purely cryptocurrency based casinos on your "whitelist?" I couldn't find one. However, it's nice to know that you endorse those cites that claim they're "provably fair" but I didn't see a single reference on your cite of you auditing any of their RNG software in order to validate that sweeping endorsement.

Anyway, I'm not going to take the time to refute the arguments about Betsofts products and comparing it to IGT because IGT is not in the same market and MicroGaming shut it's doors to the United States many years ago. But wasn't your study an in house limited scope statistical analysis that's open for interpretation? Are you saying that your analysis shows irrefutably that Betsoft cheated? And, wasn't the 2010 incident related to rogue casinos and wasn't the exploit also advantageous to players as well, and weren't they using the Cereus "RNG?" (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29/news-views-gossip-sponsored-online-poker-report/absolute-poker-keno-rigged-x-posted-nvg-zoo-898568/) But as long as your relying on IGT as a reliable brand, haven't they had similar disputes? (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/la-court-of-appeal/1080167.html)

You claim that Betsoft has a history of non-payment but I couldn't find a single case....None of the occurrences you mentioned included a default of payment obligation by Betsoft. What gives?

EDIT: And don't you think it's funny to place Betcoin on your blacklist for using Betsoft software when you yourself failed to blacklist the brand at the same time? Have you blacklisted all the casinos you endorse that use the Betsoft software? Are you sure you're not biased?

RE-EDIT: Don't get me wrong; I'm not claiming that it's impossible, or even improbable, that Betsoft is not a legitimate brand, but what I AM saying is that the evidence is far from irrefutable, and your statistical analysis is of limited scope and open for interpretation. The evidence is suspicious under certain interpretation but it's not enough to ruin honest peoples careers without further evidence.