Re: Stake.com Censors Users, Blocks Withdrawals, and Now Steals Monthly VIP Bonuses
⭐ Merited by nutildah (3)
@HolyDarkness
Ah, HolyDarkness, the self-appointed defender of Stake’s crumbling empire. It’s almost admirable how tirelessly you perform, but let’s add some clarity to your confusion:
1. Stake’s GDPR Comedy Routine
You’re here trying to sell the idea that Stake’s GDPR violations aren’t violations because they’ve invented extra hurdles for users. Spoiler alert:
GDPR isn’t a Suggestion: It’s the law. Stake doesn’t get to “personalize” compliance by adding selfie requests to delay requests.
Already Verified, Still Ignored: I’ve done KYC3, but now they want a selfie with “Stake Rules” scribbled on a Post-it? That’s not verification—it’s a gimmick to buy time.
Reality Check: Stake isn’t a bank—it’s a gambling platform known for cutting corners. Your bank analogy is as solid as Eddie’s promise of fair play.
No matter how you spin it, Stake has had over 100 days to comply and failed. That’s not my fault, nor does it absolve them of legal liability.
2. The Eddie Playbook: Lies, Loopholes, and Larceny
Let’s not kid ourselves—this is classic Eddie Hearn management:
Fraudulent Reloads: Promises of loyalty rewards that vanish faster than a gambler’s bankroll.
Rigged Games: Stake Originals? More like live theft. The evidence speaks for itself.
Illegal UPI Transactions: Stake’s gleeful disregard for Indian banking laws is just the cherry on top of their compliance failures.
Eddie’s built an empire on deception, and the cracks are showing. Stake is one regulatory investigation away from a full collapse.
3. Clowns in the Audience (Yes, That’s You)
HolyDarkness, your attempts to distract from the real issues are as transparent as Stake’s rigged odds. Let’s break down your role in this farce:
Loyal to a Fault: You’ve hitched your wagon to a company that’s burning bridges with customers, regulators, and anyone with common sense.
Ignoring Evidence: Both my case and BlackJacky’s are publicly documented, independently verifiable, and damning. Yet you cling to your denial like it’s a life raft.
PR in Disguise: Let’s be honest—you’re doing more damage control for Stake than their actual team. If you’re not on Eddie’s payroll, you should demand back pay.
4. The Bigger Picture
This isn’t just about me or BlackJacky. Stake’s fraud impacts thousands, if not millions, of users worldwide. Their shady practices:
Exploit Vulnerable Gamblers: Stake doesn’t just profit from addiction—they actively fuel it.
Mislead New Users: Glossy ads and influencer promotions hide the reality of rigged games and nonexistent support.
Dodge Accountability: From Curacao to the UK, regulators are catching on. The clock is ticking.
By defending Stake, you’re aligning yourself with a sinking ship. Don’t say we didn’t warn you when it finally goes under.
5. The Last Act
HolyDarkness, you’re playing the fool in Stake’s theater, but the audience is no longer amused. The evidence against Stake is overwhelming, and your attempts to deflect only amplify the noise.
- Stake’s GDPR violations? Documented.
- Their fraudulent practices? Exposed.
- Your role as their cheerleader? Embarrassing.
The regulators are circling, and Eddie’s show is running out of acts. You can keep juggling excuses, but when the curtain falls, you’ll be left holding the bag.
So enjoy your clown shoes while they last. The spotlight is shifting, and when it lands on Stake (and you), there’ll be no escape.
Sincerely, 🎪👑
KingBJ21
Ah, HolyDarkness, the self-appointed defender of Stake’s crumbling empire. It’s almost admirable how tirelessly you perform, but let’s add some clarity to your confusion:
1. Stake’s GDPR Comedy Routine
You’re here trying to sell the idea that Stake’s GDPR violations aren’t violations because they’ve invented extra hurdles for users. Spoiler alert:
GDPR isn’t a Suggestion: It’s the law. Stake doesn’t get to “personalize” compliance by adding selfie requests to delay requests.
Already Verified, Still Ignored: I’ve done KYC3, but now they want a selfie with “Stake Rules” scribbled on a Post-it? That’s not verification—it’s a gimmick to buy time.
Reality Check: Stake isn’t a bank—it’s a gambling platform known for cutting corners. Your bank analogy is as solid as Eddie’s promise of fair play.
No matter how you spin it, Stake has had over 100 days to comply and failed. That’s not my fault, nor does it absolve them of legal liability.
2. The Eddie Playbook: Lies, Loopholes, and Larceny
Let’s not kid ourselves—this is classic Eddie Hearn management:
Fraudulent Reloads: Promises of loyalty rewards that vanish faster than a gambler’s bankroll.
Rigged Games: Stake Originals? More like live theft. The evidence speaks for itself.
Illegal UPI Transactions: Stake’s gleeful disregard for Indian banking laws is just the cherry on top of their compliance failures.
Eddie’s built an empire on deception, and the cracks are showing. Stake is one regulatory investigation away from a full collapse.
3. Clowns in the Audience (Yes, That’s You)
HolyDarkness, your attempts to distract from the real issues are as transparent as Stake’s rigged odds. Let’s break down your role in this farce:
Loyal to a Fault: You’ve hitched your wagon to a company that’s burning bridges with customers, regulators, and anyone with common sense.
Ignoring Evidence: Both my case and BlackJacky’s are publicly documented, independently verifiable, and damning. Yet you cling to your denial like it’s a life raft.
PR in Disguise: Let’s be honest—you’re doing more damage control for Stake than their actual team. If you’re not on Eddie’s payroll, you should demand back pay.
4. The Bigger Picture
This isn’t just about me or BlackJacky. Stake’s fraud impacts thousands, if not millions, of users worldwide. Their shady practices:
Exploit Vulnerable Gamblers: Stake doesn’t just profit from addiction—they actively fuel it.
Mislead New Users: Glossy ads and influencer promotions hide the reality of rigged games and nonexistent support.
Dodge Accountability: From Curacao to the UK, regulators are catching on. The clock is ticking.
By defending Stake, you’re aligning yourself with a sinking ship. Don’t say we didn’t warn you when it finally goes under.
5. The Last Act
HolyDarkness, you’re playing the fool in Stake’s theater, but the audience is no longer amused. The evidence against Stake is overwhelming, and your attempts to deflect only amplify the noise.
- Stake’s GDPR violations? Documented.
- Their fraudulent practices? Exposed.
- Your role as their cheerleader? Embarrassing.
The regulators are circling, and Eddie’s show is running out of acts. You can keep juggling excuses, but when the curtain falls, you’ll be left holding the bag.
So enjoy your clown shoes while they last. The spotlight is shifting, and when it lands on Stake (and you), there’ll be no escape.
Sincerely, 🎪👑
KingBJ21
Throughout the long words you gave as reply, I believe we all can safely assume that the answer is "no, I have not provide the verification they asked." So I'll try to make it as clear and redundant as I can to explain, and hope that you'll understand.
[Screenshots of the clauses being mentioned here will be provided at the bottom of the post, for reference as well to make it easier for reader to read without having to go back and forth between pages. Links are there to prove that the snippets are indeed from a real article and not fabricated.]
What they asked is not a verification in sense of re-performing KYC. You've done your KYC3 [I'll take your words for it] and they most likely know about it, as they said that they can locate the account through the email address. I also believe they are more than happy to provide the data you requested. If not happily, then at least they are compelled to provide the copy of it to you by the GDPR "bylaws", that you dilligently mentioned and bring to their attention without fail, Article 15(3), "Right of acces by the data subject", as well as article 12(3), "Transparent Information [...]" specifying the maximum time of data being handed to the Data Subject.
However, if you're willing to read just a tad bit more below what you cited to them, on 12(6), I would sincerely hope that after reading that, you can easily understand that that is the situation that applied here, that they counter you with "the controller may request the provision of additional information necessary to confirm the identity of the data subject."
You did not give the additional information that can help them confirm the identity of the Data Subject, so they can't provide the documents being requested.
Thus, day 0.
Provide them with necessary identification as they requested to eradicate any reasonable doubt they have, and the timer will start, we'll be on day 0 hour 0 minute 0 second 1.
It is not me being confused, it is you being confused... or deliberately pretend you don't understand, but I'll choose to give a benefit of doubts and think that you simply misunderstood the situation.
It is not a GDPR violation, it is not a comedy, it is not a clown... well, at least, we are not the clown here. It's either [1] you simply misunderstood their instruction and request, thinking they wanted you to re-perform KYC while you've done it, while what they asked and enacting is GDPR 12(6), confirmation of the data subject, or [2] you understand things completely, you simply refused to do it and take this path.
If this excessive words still failed to help you understand, then I raise my hands in the air and declare that I can not help you further with understanding your situation with GDPR data request.
15(3)
12(3)
12(6)
