Quote from: suchmoon on Today at 04:37:48 AM

Quote from: Poker Player on Today at 03:43:46 AM

suchmoon said about 10 weeks seeing that the payments were working fine.

I need to clarify - this was about signature campaign payments. I think 10 consecutive on-time payments is not too much to ask after being chronically late for years, and it's be a good indication that there is a serious attempt to fix the issue. I can also see some merit in the argument that if the signature campaign members are willing to put up with this then why should I care, even though they're in a bit of a hostage situation.

The casino stuff is a whole other story. Having to chase the owner to withdraw your funds should be unacceptable under any circumstances. Being unable to withdraw because there is only one person capable of refilling the hot wallet and that person is sick - that's really messed up. This risk is not disclosed on the site, in fact it says that two people (lightlord and zodiac) have control of the the cold wallet funds, which would imply that either one of them could have refilled the wallet. I would call this situation "high risk".

So at this point I'm inclined to revise my rating from negative to a different negative but I'll ponder this for a little while.

is late payment really a good reason for a negative tag? it doesn’t matter if it’s a signature campaign payment or a casino withdrawal.
as far as I could see, he did not give any excuses about casino withdrawal delay, nor any accusations against users or an attempt to avoid payment. I guess users of its casinos should be alerted to the probable possibility of late payment, but not that they will run out of their money. it seems to me that there is an important difference.

Can we negative mark them because of the low payment rate in their signature campaigns? I mean, it is below any minimum, and directly affects the production of spam on the forum.