Prijatan dan.
Da, bio je to spamer; nažalost, dešava se. Zaista cenim što ste našli vremena da odgovorite.
Slažem se, ne postoji ACMA licenca za onlajn kazina.
Zato pominjem vidljivost, ali pretpostavljam da je bilo zbunjujuće — žao mi je zbog toga.
Mislio sam da jednostavno ne prikazujemo kazina australijskim igračima ako im ACMA to zabranjuje. Ne radi se o tome da kazina imaju „ACMA licencu" (jer ta licenca ne postoji u uslovima standardne licence); radi se samo o poštovanju smernica regulatora.
U vezi sa vašom žalbom: molim vas, recite mi više o delu za koji smatrate da nije obrađen kako bih mogao bolje da odgovorim. Naravno, samo ako želite.
Da bude jasno, sistem žalbi se prvenstveno odnosi na isplate. Ne može zaista da „kazni" kazino zbog neadekvatnog korisničkog iskustva ili loše komunikacije, iako su te stvari veoma važne. To sam pomenuo zato što je ishod isplate obično krajnji rezultat svakog slučaja.
Da vidimo da li možemo zajedno da shvatimo šta se dogodilo.
Good day to you.
Yes it was a spammer; sadly, it happens. I truly appreciate you finding the time to respond back.
I agree, There’s no such thing as an ACMA license for online casinos.
That is why I mention the visibility, but I guess it was confusing—I'm sorry for that.
I meant that we simply don’t show casinos to Australian players if ACMA prohibits them. It’s not about casinos being "ACMA-licensed" (because that license doesn’t exist in the terms of a standard license); it’s just about respecting the regulator’s guidance.
About your complaint: please tell me more about the part you feel wasn’t addressed so I can respond better. Only if you want to, of course.
To be clear, the complaint system primarily addresses payouts. It can’t really "punish" a casino for inadequate user experience or poor communication, even though those things matter a lot. I mentioned that because the payout outcome is usually the bottom line of each case.
Let’s see if we can make sense of what happened together.
Automatski prevedeno:
