Dakle, da li sam u pravu kada pretpostavljam da Softsviss tvrdi da je prekršio T&C?
Ako je to slučaj, izgleda da Antilephone (treba li da ih nazovemo i Softsviss?), sa svojom nepravomoćnošću, zapravo zauzima stranu kazina tako što vam prosleđuje glupo pravilo za koje tvrde da ste prekršili (što bi takođe moglo biti pravilo maksimalne pobede).
U svakom slučaju, kada jedna kompanija poseduje platformu, operatere, kazina, provajdere, igre, servere, filijale I telo za licenciranje... završićete u ovakvoj situaciji.
DAMA/Direk/Hollicorn/N1 - BGaming/Booongo/Booming Games/3OAKS/Plaison - Antilephone NV - Softsviss ---> Putin
PS Ako iznenada prestanem da budem aktivan član ovog sajta, znaćete da je to zato što sam slučajno pao na smrt sa poslednjeg sprata višespratnice - kroz prozor ojačan staklom, mogao bih da dodam - dok pijani i izazivajući komešanje.. sve nakon konzumiranja koktela lekova protiv bolova na bazi opijata, arsena i cijanida.
So am I correct in assuming Softswiss is alleging breach of T&C?
If that's the case, it appears that Antillephone (should we maybe call them Softswiss, too?), with its non-ruling, is in effect taking the side of the casino by forwarding to you whatever stupid rule they allege that you've broken (which could also be a max win rule).
Either way, when one company owns the platform, operators, casinos, providers, games, servers, affiliates AND the licensing body.. you end up in this type of situation.
DAMA/Direx/Hollycorn/N1 - BGaming/Booongo/Booming Games/3OAKS/Playson - Antillephone NV - Softswiss ---> Putin
P.S. If I suddenly stop being an active member of this site, you'll know it's because I accidentally fell to my death from the top floor of a high-rise building - through a riot-glass-reinforced window, I might add - while drunk and causing a commotion.. all after consuming a cocktail of opiate-based painkillers, arsenic and cyanide.
Ažurirano od strane autora pre 1 meseca
Automatski prevedeno: