-snip-
2. jasonort in silience agreed on a deal with them, letting the crooks go free.
-snip-
Jasonort doubtless won the jackpot legitimately:
-> the terms do not differentiate between directly paid max bets and won max bets
-> if on-reels bonus games would not qualify for the jackpot, they would have definitely excluded them in the "Features" terms
On the final spin I get five Yachts on the payline which in my opinion should have triggered the jackpot. Instead I was paid 1000 credits. This I believe this is evidence to the fact that it was a max bet according to the pay table. 5 yachts = 200 credits x Number of bets per line. Five bets per line is the maximum. Based on them paying me 1000 credits they're essentially stating that I bet the max amount.
1) Jasonort let the crooks go free, because he has no interest to claim and enforce the jackpot he won
2) The deal Jasonort agreed is juridically not valid, because
a) A deal requires to state the deal partners and the applicable jurisdiction
b) Jasonort was extorted to accept the deal, because the operator hide his identity and he was not able to enforce his basic right to go to a court
3) Jasonort still has the right to enforce his claim at a court of the applicable jurisdiction. But this would logically require to know it.
4) I did not make any research so far, but there are possibly traces that could lead to the identity of the operator
a) The Winning Poker Network in Costa Rica
b) Their software provider(s) like Betsoft in Malta
c) And so on