You can't edit a thread [as in the opening post] unless you're the OP of the said thread. I believe you know this. Were you trying to say that you'll edit the post quoted above with lists of cases? If so, I'll suggest you to create a new and separate thread instead of posting it here.
It'll rather be OOT if you post it here... though with careful and proper wording, I think you can make it a bit on-topic.
Talking about OOT a little... that guy on Stake who bets on Porter, I wonder what made him think the repercussion for such violation [be it deliberate or his claim is true that he's just following a trend] will just earn him a slap on the wrist, get the bet voided, and he will ultimately still get his funds returned. I would love to see the world he grew up in.
Then I’ll do it this way since I said I don’t want to pile on Sportsbet. If Steve or Jeremy deny that Sportsbet is taking deposits for first time offenses, I’ll hunt down cases. Otherwise I won’t clog up the forum and will just comment on new cases.
How do you propose this to be done? Do you want me to invite Steve and/or Jeremy to come back here? Far as I know, once they mark a case as settled [or handled externally, for this case], they're not returning to the thread. So your statement above has a very high chance of being missed.
The Stake player did nothing wrong. He was unfortunate to bet a game that turned out to be rigged. The player wasn’t in on it. Exclude the winnings and give him the rest of the money. Stake can’t steal the money from every single player that happened to bet that game. Other books aren’t stealing that money from anyone except those in on the fix.
Even those deposits will most likely have to be returned since it’s still under investigation. DraftKings blew the whistle and I don’t think there’s been a conclusion to the case.
How sure are we that he's innocent? Just like Stake can't prove that he got tipped to place the bet, that player can't also prove that his claim is true, that he's simply following the trend. I personally find it quite raising an eyebrow that [if he's simply following a trend] he placed a bet that's significantly higher than his usual bets, or that he bets on props. Maybe you can look into his betting history and do a profiling on him based on the data?
Oh, by the way, if I may ventured OOT just a bit further, to straighten things, in case there is any doubt about my "bias", that I made those statement on that thread based on assumption, Stake's ToS actually covered about holding the fund for such circumstances. I had it screen captured in one of my device in case the necessity ever arise. He simply did not "scrub" deep enough.
And no, this is not me being partial and siding with Stake. I still condemn their decision to drag cases for months and I still like to see myself as impartial on that case [despite that user seemingly think I am a devil's spawn]. I'm simply stating a fact here. A clause is written on their ToS, so I pointed that out.
It’s not for nefarious reasons but you are obviously siding with Stake. No one has proved the player did anything wrong and you think Stake can steal. There are no clauses that the player has broken.
Think logically. When people rig a game they make big bets. The line starts moving, a trend is set and honest people jump in on the bet. These people did nothing wrong.