Jasonort didn't win the jackpot....jasonort's claim was that he should have won the jackpot because it wasn't clarified anywhere that "freespin" wasn't equivalent to "maxbet spin" on a bonus round. If the jackpot was won, it would have dropped....it didn't because "freespin" does not equal "max bet" in the coding. Claiming that he did win it is a misrepresentation of the facts because the argument was that he should have won it because it wasn't explained that "freespins" didn't qualify as a "max bet." Try to think about this objectively: what if there was a similar instance in one of the games at moneypot where a player claimed he should have won the jackpot because the rules were ambiguous....should the investors pay the player anyway based on the player's subjective interpretation, even though the event wasn't coded into the software? If the terms were ambiguous enough to create conflict, should the moneypot investors request the terms be clarified to avoid similar conflicts in the future? Either way one slices it...."free" and "maximum" are antonyms and not synonyms....so the interpretation was more of a reach than not.
I disagree with most of the things you wrote there. I could go through and reply line by line but I've seen others attempt to do that and it doesn't work out well.
I'll dip my toe in the water with your most obvious incorrect statement:
> "free" and "maximum" are antonyms
The antonym of "maximum" is "minimum". You really cannot believe that those two words are antonyms. Can you?
Twitchy misrepresented the facts by mixing terms associated with other games (Greedy Goblins) into the argument with the game in question (The Glam Life)....that's deception. He also photo-shops images....that's also deception....he consistently trolls and manipulates the facts to meet his agenda. Are we trying to be truthful and objective here or are we bandwagoning to suit our interests?
I don't think Twitchy ever claimed that the rules for one game were the rules for another game. If he did, perhaps you could quote the post where he did so. Making all these accusations with nothing to back them up adds nothing to the argument. You say he multi-accounts, he says "only to chat and post", you let the thread drop, but go back to accusing him of multi-accounting. It's the same with each of your accusations. You accuse, he defends, you ignore his defense and go back to step 1. Try harder.
I've had good experiences with betcoin. I'm something like 10 BTC up there and didn't have any trouble withdrawing my winnings.
I've also had bad experiences with betcoin. Their customer support is among the worst I have ever experienced. Tickets go ignored for months at a time.
I'll dip my toe in the water with your most obvious incorrect statement:
> "free" and "maximum" are antonyms
The antonym of "maximum" is "minimum". You really cannot believe that those two words are antonyms. Can you?
> "free" and "maximum" are antonyms
The antonym of "maximum" is "minimum". You really cannot believe that those two words are antonyms. Can you?
Words have more than one definition and they also have more than one antonym. "Free" when used in the monetary sense, as in "freespin" means not costly, minimum fee, or zero wager. "Maximum" when used in the monetary sense, as in "maxbet spin," means most costly, maximum fee, or absolute wager. So, yes, I do believe that "maxbet spin" and "freespin" have opposite meanings and, therefore, they are antonyms and not synonyms.
I don't think Twitchy ever claimed that the rules for one game were the rules for another game. If he did, perhaps you could quote the post where he did so.
This is what I said: "Twitchy misrepresented the facts by mixing terms associated with other games (Greedy Goblins) into the argument with the game in question (The Glam Life)." And here is the proof: https://bitcointalk.org/index.phptopic=1517648.msg15315404#msg15315404
Making all these accusations with nothing to back them up adds nothing to the argument. You say he multi-accounts, he says "only to chat and post", you let the thread drop, but go back to accusing him of multi-accounting. It's the same with each of your accusations. You accuse, he defends, you ignore his defense and go back to step 1. Try harder.
I provided evidence....it's just ignored....or cluttered over with tons of spammy nonsense. But, since you requested it personally, I will reiterate it here.
Twitchy admitted to having multiple accounts: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.15655618 Yes, he claims that he had them just to spam the chat box and we could believe him if we thought he were honest. But then we find this <---(link) where he admits to playing as OHYEAH and TwitchySeal. So, on further investigation he has, in fact, been playing with alternate accounts and not just using his "tons of accounts" to spam the system as he claims.
He is OHYEAH here:
And, he is twitchyseal here:
One might be able to make the argument that "twitchyseal" and "TwitchySeal" are different names, which they undoubtedly are, but then we find this <--(link) where he wrote an article which includes a screenshot of him playing as "twitchyseal."
I've had good experiences with betcoin. I'm something like 10 BTC up there and didn't have any trouble withdrawing my winnings.
I've also had bad experiences with betcoin. Their customer support is among the worst I have ever experienced. Tickets go ignored for months at a time.
I've also had bad experiences with betcoin. Their customer support is among the worst I have ever experienced. Tickets go ignored for months at a time.
Yes, I agree. They've had issues but they are learning, growing, and trying to create a good product. Their customer support may have seemed aberrant at times to some, but not everybody....they've been trolled, spammed, and misrepresented continuously over the last couple years. They're doing something different here and there's a learning curve to what they're doing....They're very generous and they're not trying to rip anybody off.
Note: Fixed syntax issues in quoted post.
