But how do we fact check this without knowing the total number of players and the percentage of them who had the KYC card? I mean, 500 players running around the internet could still represent a very small number of their userbase. Pretty much why I never buy any "rare" claims cause it'd be hard to verify anyhow.
Posting here on Bitcointalk that I was asked for KYC twice within a month triggered a bonus hunting flag on my Jackbit account. It was claimed (here on bitcointalk) that I was asked for KYC the 1st time because Jackbit found 51 identical IP addresses. I was never told this was the reason for this first KYC request. And then, what was the reason for the 2nd KYC request less than a month later ? Only after my bitcointalk post, was it mentioned publicly on this forum why I was flagged for KYC the first time. I don't know how to fact check the per Capita KYC proportion - however, readers can draw their own conclusions based on what I wrote just before this sentence. I absolutely agree with you about not buying "rare" claims - just do KYC or play at a fully anonymous casino (Nitrobetting, etc.).
Not necessarily because members with account problems could be in PMs with representatives. TBH, I don't think most people would be overanalyzing a standard greeting a typical customer support does.
It's strange then that I was told my account was flagged at Jackbit in the public forum rather than by Bitcointalk PM if that were the case.