Quote from: suchmoon on December 07, 2019, 05:31:24 AM

Quote from: amishmanish on December 07, 2019, 03:56:12 AM

Like someone said in the beginning, INTENT MATTERS. While you want to stick to the technicality, you (and a lot of others) are willing to ignore the grey area of INTENT.

I'm not ignoring the intent but what was the intent really? Do you think yahoo62278 intentionally clicked 36x for a chance to stick it to roobet? That sounds very very unlikely given the probabilities involved.

My thinking on this goes something like this. Quoting from another reply:

Quote from: amishmanish on December 07, 2019, 04:46:26 AM

Imagine if you knew beforehand that the site has a bug whereby it will accept the over bets as well as display the X36 winnings. (Which yahoo knew). What stops you from deciding to throw in a bunch of calculated risks to "exploit" the bug and then later claim to have been wronged??

The website and yahoo were on very collaborative terms post launch. This could have gone many ways if they had a strategy to mitigate this. Including this being considered a "foul" or "disqualifying" move of some sort and him just getting refunded despite hitting. I said in the first reply itself, that thinking along these lines is a subjective judgement. (Like what if a newbie said the same thing?) Also, thinking from the viewpoint of the developers behind this.

Quote from: amishmanish on December 07, 2019, 03:56:12 AM

If i started a website as a developer with my own time and money in this increasingly getting desolate corner of bitcoin ecosystem (where people seem to think that adoption will come from casinos and mixers), had someone trustworthy know about the max bet, and then have the same person come back and try to extort, I'll be salty as fuck. Especially when i have been respecting the said person because apparently they have a reputation.

Quote from: suchmoon on December 07, 2019, 05:31:24 AM

The bottom line for me is that yahoo62278 bet money, was shown an $11k+ win (took me 4 pages to figure that out LOL), but didn't get it.

Doesn't it matter that he already know that the 11K WOULD NOT pay out, Even if it showed that?? Despite that, he raised a flag on them. If its completely about being an upright user and holding the casino to "technical standards" then shouldn't we just rely on the TOS for that?

Quote from: suchmoon on December 07, 2019, 05:31:24 AM

If he hadn't been shown more than $2k then I'd be leaning towards "shitty".

Its not like the potential win is shown beforehand. I don't know what are the implicit norms when compared with other sites. Max win does show when you hover on that ? symbol beside "bet amount".

Quote from: suchmoon on December 07, 2019, 05:31:24 AM

I don't know why you're so worked up about tangential stuff like "big boys club" or whatever.

I know its not a popular opinion. Its only natural that there is groupism. Yet, when post after post refuses to acknowledge that Yahoo as a user was well aware of this. He got paid 2K. Good for him. Yet, raising a flag like this isn't entirely justified. And IF it is for the benefit of the community, then he shouldn't make it about him getting paid. On a forum like this, people with influence should be held to better standards and, ideally, vice-versa. I have ranted about this in my earlier replies too and I get it that its more of an ideological debate. And its not just groupism that I mentioned.