Quote from: TwitchySeal on October 25, 2016, 02:24:50 PM

Quote from: bitstars.net on October 25, 2016, 09:11:24 AM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on October 25, 2016, 08:58:54 AM

Quote from: bitstars.net on October 25, 2016, 08:30:01 AM

Quote from: TwitchySeal on October 25, 2016, 07:57:08 AM

Just answer the question please.

Quote

If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.

What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions)

If the over under is 0.5, that means there's a 50% chance that 1 or more players violate a term and a 50% chance that 0 do.

I think it would be much higher at Bitstarz.

What do you think it would be?

What do you think would be acceptable?

Hi there,

I don't have any exact statistics on that, we do not keep track of how many people that are breaching that rule
and is suffering the consequences, as again, we let many slide. I can just say that they are a very small minority
as I personally get to hear about them, and I also know the amount of active players we have in the casino and
the amount of new players we get in.

So, you thinking it's much higher at BitStarz, what do you base that figure on? A few people writing about it in the forum when
we have thousands of continuous new depositing players?

I'd rather focus on the circumstances rather than a number. This is a case by case question. If you suddenly get overrun by a
mob of fraudsters opening 100 accounts each and try to claim the welcome package an equal amount of times, I think the
ratio is less relevant. What should be focused on is detecting and separating the genuine players from the abusers.

Mike

I'm not asking you for exact statistics. I'm asking your opinion. This is a hypothetical situation.

Quote

If you went out at got 100 random people who have never gambled online before, and you gave them 1 bitcoin or 600 euro each for them to deposit on your site after signing up, and reading the terms and conditions.

What's the over under on how many of them commit a violation that gives bitstarz the right to seize their winnings? ( all new players that know very little about gambling, none of them have any malicious intentions)

Hi there,

Well, you got a more elaborate answer above here, so I hope that answers your question. But I see your point,
and at BitStarz, less than 5% would have anything confiscated in the casino. I just want to point out that this, it depends on what markets
you operate in and a lot of other factors.

Bonus abuse in general tend to be more likely in certain markets than others. Just as you would assume that corruption
or any other type of crime would be more wide-spread in certain areas. Therefore, what markets you operate in could
make a huge difference to how many people get confiscated, I hope that makes sense.

To answer your question, I believe that the confiscation rate should be way lower than 5% to be fair, and that's what it
is at BitStarz.

Mike

I'm asking about the violation rate though, not confiscation rate.

Here's another question to think about:

If we got in a time machine and went back to replay the last year and the only difference was a rule that forced you destroy all seized fund: what % of players would have been paid previously had their funds taken?

To follow up with twitchyseal's inquiry. I would like to know what percentage of WINNING PLAYERS' funds are confiscated? vs your 5% figure for ALL players.

My point is, for example.. say that maybe 15% of players come out on top and I assume you only use this dumb rule on these players to confiscate their winnings. The 5% overall figure would probably be much closer to like 25% if you only count winning players? something like that... I would love to hear your response

btcgmbling

Posts

Merits