Quote from: CryptSafe on Today at 01:39:24 PM

Quote from: Beparanf on Today at 12:19:47 PM

Quote from: BlackyJacky on Today at 11:57:25 AM

Quote from: ryzaadit on Today at 11:12:48 AM

People can use the help from @holydarknes who are voluntire on help some casino case.

Problem is that @HolyDarkness is not qualified to offer online casino dispute mediation!

I’m not trying to continuously reply to your post but you always comment a questionable remark purely because of your personal hatred to Casino and User here.

I’ve been following @holydarkness contribution in the forum for a long time and he manage to help a lot of users with issue without asking for payment. All of that effort for voluntary work.

So it’s just so hard to ignore a remark like this to valuable member of the forum.

Of a truth holydarkness contributions to helping resolve issues between members of this platform and casinos can not be undermined, he has been doing this voluntarily here as a result of his reputation on this platform. ordinarily, if it were to be some p[people, they would charge some percentage fee in rewards for any case successfully resolved but holydarkness is quite a different person and I am so much impressed by his benevolence here on this platform.
Contacting him would not be an issue as he would get notifications at the mention of his name here, maybe through these comments he would know what is happening but it would also be nice if the complainant sent him a message so he would be aware of it as just mentioning his name here would not really be a direct way of attracting his attention.

Thank you for the kind words, but again, unfortunately, I can't help with Stake-related issue other than adding it to my list and monitoring the development and reflect the most recent update [whether it gets resolved or still being addressed in CG or AG or elsewhere], as unlike other casinos, I don't have contact of Stake, and Stake's representative who actively sweep the SA board [and I noticed she popped in this thread quite often] has explicitly told me not to update and reach her through PM for new cases, thus I stopped writing her a PM, lest it be considered as an unsolicited message that got me banned.

I've try to get a contact of someone, basically anyone at Stake, but Stake's door unfortunately remains shut at me. I'll repeat that this far, Stake is the only casino that I can't reach and help their players to get a solution, other than adding it to my list. Thus, sadly, cases of esintim and helpme100, I can't do much.

Now, moving to the problem with above user, it is that I "refused" to add his case to to my list despite his demand. I refused, because I can't. I can't, because he does not have a thread that I can add to the list, he just wrote posts on others' thread. What should I wrote in my list as his "thread"? A post? On someone else's thread? I've explained nicely to him, that he need to have his own thread, with strong supporting evidence, and I'll gladly add his case to my list right away.

And he somehow, for unknown reason, can't accept this, and insist that all he presented this far [posts on others' thread] is enough for his case to be added to the list, and me not adding it annoyed him so much that he started to be the way he is right now, and polluting my thread of casino list every now and then with, well... read for yourself.

At least that's what I perceive about how we ended up on this situation, where he spammed me whenever he can, and I basically ignored him as I think it'll be wise to let him bark. Less headache for me. I find no reason to address him and his accusation of me being "mediator", as replying him on my thread will just further spam the thread with meaningless discussion, and addressing his accusation on other thread will come to a deaf ear.

Further, and this is an interesting thing... that'll probably trigger him and raises his blood pressure: after months of... well, him doing what he did, curiosity gets the best of me and I digged CG for his case. He did raise a case on CG, and it was refused under the basis of:

That "proof", has been repeatedly presented, countless times, on numerous threads, and been explained exhaustively by many members, that also come to a deaf ear. Hence the expression that Zwei said.