Well, its what it is, Rollbit is beginning to cross the line and I really hope that they know what they are doing, they shouldn't jeopardize their efforts in all the years theyve spent building their reputation and gaining trust from the gambling community
And I think their silence to all of this makes the matter worst - but any ways, let's hope they come around and put an end to all of the accusations, so they don't end up like 1xbit did, Roll bit Is a great casino and I believe they won't allow thier users ruin their reputation.
I think you can rest assured as I don't think Rollbit has any plan to jeopardize their efforts in all these years. The case is not that simple --or perhaps... it
is simple--
stakemeharder and rollbit both shared the blame here. stakemeharder explained it themselves on the opening post of their accusation thread that they utilized certain strategy that many gambling sites will likely frowned upon, and Razer is not exactly silent, he has shared Rollbit's insight for this matter.
I don't think that Rollbits will allow this issue to linger for too long to the point of destroying their reputation here in the forum and at that we should give them time to come up with an explanation as to why they took the decisions they take and what the remedy for the ops since it obvious that Rollbit is a little off track this time and there is need for readjustment and cleaning up of the mess this accusation have created for roll bits reputation here in the forum and outside the forum also.
I don't mean to be rude, but if you bother to look at the thread being talked here, you'll see that Rollbit
did not allow the issue to linger too long. They attended to the case the instance they went online and noticed my PM informing them about it, they've come with an explanation.
If there is any "mistake" that Razer made, is that he's not explaining in detail of the violation made by stakemeharder and instead throwing a blanket statement. Which... the people overseeing that thread has been trying to remedy, to get a better explanation and insight for the case, although --IMO-- stakemeharder's case is quite clear.
If you both still interested to pursue this case and engage in further discussion regarding this matter, I invite you both to continue the discussion
here instead of on this thread as to not derailing this thread as well as to focusing the whole discussion and development in one place. Talking about one matter on two --or multiple-- threads at once will just confuses anyone overseeing the case as they'll have to go back and forth between the intersecting threads to keep themselves updated.