Do you even... read and try to understand what I wrote in the first place? Or you literally ranting like a five years old on the first read without digesting them?
The money laundering message, the AML-action response, is Rollbit's blanket statement for whatever clause their player breached. He's very much likely not a money launderer, the AML counter-accusation Rollbit gave as their verdict is a global response they give as their verdict, just like suspicion of multi-account being their blanket statement that invites their player to email their compliance team, of which players' actual cases will then be sorted out and got into its bottom.
You want the childish name given to you to stop being uttered? Then behave like an adult and try to understand a situation in a non-biased manner before jumping into posting gibberish. How exactly do you want people to treat you like an adult if whatever comes from your keyboard is almost an equivalent of a five years old's rant that tries to looks important?
Want to say I'm the one throwing tantrum instead of you actually admitting that you uttered gibberish? Read this thread again from the point I jumped in and explained what OP asked. There was no single indication of me ruling against the player, I am simply explaining from what Razer explained to me, in addition to what I witnessed myself upon piles of Rollbit's response on this SA board following their most recent approach to handle cases. And you still come into conclusion that I am ruling against player/sports bettor?
I never said you ruled against the current player. You mentioned value player. I didn’t want that to play a role. I asked your definition of value player. You threw a tantrum.
Why aren’t you asking for the player’s betting history. If he’s putting in a lot of action, beats CLV and is a lifetime winner, most likely he’s just a smart player and Rollbit is stealing. If he’s making -ev with a 1x roll, he may be money laundering. It’s simple profiling..
The point still stands.
My post explained about why Rollbit accuses OP of money laundering, OP asked about this on his opening post, and I explained that it's a blanket statement that Rollbit [most regrettably] use as a reply to deliver their final verdict, regardless of the clauses being breached, for example [I use "let's say" on that post, of which, darling boy, is a figurative words for "for example"] arbing, value betting, bypassing betting limitation, etc.
There is a very huge chance that OP never laundering money, nor it is known what breach OP did. Hence the word "most regretably" [sic].
You understand that now, boy?
Let's go a tad bit more difficult to understand than above already difficult [for you] to comprehend, shall we?
Why don't I ask for player's betting history? Well, what good did it bring? Our hands are tied since Rollbit changed their approach to handle cases by asking players to write to compliance. Once players wrote to compliance, things are out of anyone's hand. Of which, when they got to the bottom of the player's case, for whatever breach it is, or perhaps no breach at all, I believe none of us ever know, the explanation will be AML, and no one can refute that decision. At least this far and to the length of my knowledge, no one ever did.
Now, try to digest those information like a champ and stop derailing the simple post if you want to start to be seen like an actual adult.