Ninjastic
PostEdited versionsQuotes to this post
Next scheduled rescrape ... never
Version 1
Last scraped
Scraped on 20/08/2025, 19:19:15 UTC
Quote from: holydarkness on August 20, 2025, 06:34:50 PM
Quote from: Rating Place on August 20, 2025, 06:23:17 PM
If FIUCuracao is involved, then it’s a case of money laundering. It’s not what you think.

It's not what I think? You sure?

What I think is Rollbit needs a flag, perhaps a type-2 or type-3 flag, that unfortunately can only be raised by the forum member who directly involved in the matter. As well as whether I can and will support the flag is highly depending on the nature of the said player's case and wordings.

I've also been wondering for perhaps a month or two now about raising type-1 flag myself as type-1 can be raised by anyone who doesn't need to be directly affected by the matter, but to fairly do that, I'll need to re-review and made follow ups to each and single cases in my list that's marked as "in progress" so that the necessity of the flag can be weighted in fairly, a thing that I have to say quite a feat to do as it kept slipping from my mind during weekdays, and when I do update my list on the weekend and saw the abundant "in progress" and being reminded of my intention, I procrastinate by wanting to finish updating the list first, and then I forgot, again. Or procrastinate. And the cycle continues.

That is not what I think? A flag? So what exactly do you think I think?
You do a great job and have helped a lot of people so let's not harp on this too long. I'll answer the one question above and add some.

The only cases that you have problems with are the sports gambling cases. I feel that you would have asked a lot of irrelevant questions putting doubt to the players innocence and your decision would have taken months. You keep saying that you are a bridge but you have made decisions on guilt many times.

With the sports betting cases, you must get the player's betting history. It will cut the time down in the sports gambling cases. Your opinion on the Bet Fury case should have been over after you saw that Bet Fury tried to free roll the player.

Also, I still don't think you have a handle on sportsbook flags and odds providers. The flags mean nothing, the books need solid evidence pfof wrong-doing. Profiling flags should be ignored without proof of guilt. Odds providers have nothing to do with payouts.
Original archived Re: Rollbit.com – $47K Legit Winnings Seized, False AML Claim (User: Fatio07)
Scraped on 20/08/2025, 19:14:33 UTC
Quote from: holydarkness on August 20, 2025, 06:34:50 PM
Quote from: Rating Place on August 20, 2025, 06:23:17 PM
If FIUCuracao is involved, then it’s a case of money laundering. It’s not what you think.

It's not what I think? You sure?

What I think is Rollbit needs a flag, perhaps a type-2 or type-3 flag, that unfortunately can only be raised by the forum member who directly involved in the matter. As well as whether I can and will support the flag is highly depending on the nature of the said player's case and wordings.

I've also been wondering for perhaps a month or two now about raising type-1 flag myself as type-1 can be raised by anyone who doesn't need to be directly affected by the matter, but to fairly do that, I'll need to re-review and made follow ups to each and single cases in my list that's marked as "in progress" so that the necessity of the flag can be weighted in fairly, a thing that I have to say quite a feat to do as it kept slipping from my mind during weekdays, and when I do update my list on the weekend and saw the abundant "in progress" and being reminded of my intention, I procrastinate by wanting to finish updating the list first, and then I forgot, again. Or procrastinate. And the cycle continues.

That is not what I think? A flag? So what exactly do you think I think?
You do a great job and have helped a lot of people so let's not harp on this too long. I'll answer the one question above and add some.

The only cases that you have problems with are the sports gambling cases. I feel that you would have asked a lot of irrelevant questions putting doubt to the players innocence and your decision would have taken months. You keep saying that you are a bridge but you have made decisions on guilt many times.

With the sports betting cases, you must get the player's betting history. It will cut the time down in the sports gambling cases. Your opinion on the Bet Fury case should have been over after you saw that Bet Fury tried to free roll the player.

Also, I still don't think you have a handle on flags and odds providers. The flags mean nothing, the books need solid evidence pf wrong-doing. Profiling flags should be ignored without proof of guilt. Odds providers have nothing to do with payouts.