5 dimes did the switch on hommie

[Halifax]

Patrick:

I'm disappointed in you.

This is one of those cases where you would have been better served to actually read the whole thread, or AT LEAST read the actual wording on the 5Dimes website. Your belief is based on what you believe the blanket definition of an "Active Account" is to you. However, the term "Active Account" is NOT USED by 5Dimes.

I won't call you up on the phone and recite every post in this thread, but since you're a nice guy, I will copy the actual wording of the rule at 5 Dimes:

"Bonuses earned after deposits and Sportsbook/Casino transfers are only valid if the amount deposited remains active in the account for 30 days. Winnings may be redeemed as desired."

---------------------

Let's narrow this down to the specific relevant phrase and analyze it:

"...if the amount deposited remains active in the account for 30 days"

1. Patrick, it does not say that the deposit REMAINS IN the account for 30 days. It says that the "amount deposited REMAINS ACTIVE IN the account for 30 days". There is a big difference - if the wording says "REMAIN IN" the account, certainly the guy would deserve to be paid. However, the deposit needs to "remain ACTIVE IN" the account - this means something more than zero bets and zero dollars for the final 29 days. I agree that they should define what their definition of "Active" is, but I am 100% sure this guy's deposit DID NOT remain active for the 30 days.

2. The word "REMAINS" in the term "amount deposited REMAINS active" is in reference to some previous event. If something "remains", it is in reference to some event or some "state" that was in existence at an earlier time. In this case, having the deposit "remain active" is in reference to the earlier "betting" that took place. Thus, "remaining active" means continuing to place bets for the 30 days. Again, how active is "Active, I don't know, but this guy bet nothing after the first 6 hours of blackjack.
--------------------------------------

Patrick, this guy could come with his argument from two angles: either he did enough to satisfy the "spirit" of his contract with 5Dimes, or he did enough to satisfy "their written rules" (the "letter of the law", if you will). Clearly, this guy satisfied neither.

By almost every account (including C.M. at Bet2Gamble), this guy was an out-and-out bonus hunter, so he did not satisfy the "spirit" of his contract with 5Dimes.

By my analysis of their written rules, I think I have proven that he did not satisfy "their written rules" either. Again, their use of the term "... REMAINS ACTIVE IN ..." is very ambiguous and begs for clarification. But the deposit remaining "ACTIVE IN THE ACCOUNT FOR 30 DAYS" means betting "something ... some amount beyond zero" during the final 29 days. This guy bet nothing after the first 6 hours.

It's one thing to debate whether or not this rule at 5Dimes is a good rule. I don't like it, and most players don't like it.

However, I hate to see a good book get bashed for simply following their own rules (however hard to stomach that rule may be to the player).

And, in summary, I strongly believe that 5Dimes should define what their definition of "REMAINING ACTIVE" means, so we don't see this problem pop up again.

 

[jateeluv]

"But the deposit remaining "ACTIVE IN THE ACCOUNT FOR 30 DAYS" means betting "something ... some amount" during the final 29 days. "

who is to say this is what it means when there is not a definition or explanation exactly what it means... Its just an opinion, active in the account for 30 days could mean 2 things.

 

[Halifax]

jaateluv:

You are wrong.

If 5Dimes demanded that the money simply be kept in the account for 30 days, they would have said the the deposit "REMAINS IN" the account for 30 days.

The term "REMAINS ACTIVE IN" means something more. It means something more than zero bets for 29 days - how much more than zero is what needs to be clarified.

If the guy bet $1 on blackjack per day for the final 29 days, I would say he should get paid the bonus. He would have violated the "spirit" of the contract, but by the "letter of the law", and the ambiguousness of the wording, he might have satisfied the written rules.

However, this guy bet zero after the first 6 hours.

 

[SENDITIN]

If you're going to be a bonus whore(which I have no problem with), make sure you thoroughly understand the rules of the casino before posting up. If it says keep your account active for thirty days, then make sure you do! Don't telegraph your intentions by being cute and doing the rollover all in one day and then not playing. That's like posting up on the sportsbook side and picking them off on Don Best moves right out of the gate. While I don't particularly care for their rules, it is THEIR RULES. Therefore I side with Five Dimes in this dispute, though they probably would have come out better if they paid off and booted the guy.

 

[Halifax]

senditin:

Exactly.

 

[seawave]

The message I got from the manager of 5Dimes is that his reputation is worth no more than $200 match play bonus.

 

[PatrickMcIrish]

Halifax - while I always respect your opinion on these things people will sometimes see things differently so don't get upset if I am on the other side here. As I go back and read this thread I see nothing that changes my mind. You quote CM in your response but Strutt says he has pulled 5Dimes completely out of his directory. Obviously he is not happy with what 5Dimes is doing. Buzz with SBR deals with this stuff more than anyone alive and he also thinks this man should be paid and the rules on "active account" be made clearer. I agree. As I said to me an active account is a funded account, end of story. I can call and they will sometimes ask do you have an active account and I take that to mean am I funded at that time or not. I never take it as a particular amount of action on a certain amount of days or anything else. If this is incorrect than define what active is. Don't just lay back until I wait the 30 days to execute all the stepps required to cash in and then get hit with new requirements. He did the required rollovers and he waited the proper time frame?

Lastly on this while I'm not a bonus whore I am tired of the books offering these deals and then whining about it. They have a whole page directed towards bonus whores. A whole page!! Then when one beats them at their own game they stiff the guy and put him down for taking advantage of what THEY offer. Very easy answer for a book that does not want to deal with bonus hunters, VERY EASY. Don't offer any bonuses!!! To me it's like a man who chooses to smoke 40 years and then sues the company that makes cigarettes. Take some responsbility for your actions. You want bonus hunters you got them. What is telling in all this to me was one guy got his bonus with no problems as he lost most of his $500, the guy that is having problems is having trouble because he won. They both wagered almost exactly the same amounts of money and were "active" the same time periods! Pretty transparent in my opinion from the side of the book. We offer bonuses in our casino but expect you to play long enough to lose....

 

[hamneggs]

Good to see you in this thread buddy.

Haven't read your post yet, but wanted to welcome you into this thread.

Read it, right on the money.

 

[RobFunk]

same here but I dont need 500 words of text to say it. but anyways right, I called up this one book and said "hey I read your rules, that entitles me to like some free money or something." and the clerk was like "just beacuse you read the rules?" and I was like "yeah" so the clerk said "sorry we cant help you." and hung up. I read some words and stuff I think that entitles me to some book's dough. so thats my delima guys. can you help me out? or should I start a new thread with a 180 replys in it scrutinizing a book who does everything right except the charity portion.

LAME

 

[PatrickMcIrish]

Thanks Hammy, like you I am always happy to lay my opinion out there. Good or bad.

 

[hamneggs]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RobFunk:
same here but I dont need 500 words of text to say it. but anyways right, I called up this one book and said "hey I read your rules, that entitles me to like some free money or something." and the clerk was like "just beacuse you read the rules?" and I was like "yeah" so the clerk said "sorry we cant help you." and hung up. I read some words and stuff I think that entitles me to some book's dough. so thats my delima guys. can you help me out? or should I start a new thread with a 180 replys in it scrutinizing a book who does everything right except the charity portion.

_LAME_<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Rob, a promotional offer is actually an offer to make a contract in the USA. If the offer is accepted, then the offeror is legally bound.

It is not "charity" as you suggest. Their PROMOTIONAL BONUS OFFER neither sounds like charity on the 5 DIMES BONUS PAGE. Conversely, it is "another way to win" that 5 DIMES came up with. (their words) If the 5 DIMES BONUS PROMOTION is charity, then call it charity instead of "another way to win."

It may take you well over 500 words before you make a valid point.

 

[PatrickMcIrish]

LMAO!!!

 

[Halifax]

P. McIrish:

Here is what CM posted about the situation:

"Technically, 5Dimes was in the right not to pay shlomo's money because he was not active by any stretch of the imagination, but their attitude towards players is hostile at best, and their rules are not defined well enough. Therefore, we are removing 5Dimes from our directory until they clearly define what their bonus wagering requirements are. If they want to get back in our directory, they will have to draw that "map". "
------------------------------


I obviously am not the owner of any "Directory" to remove or not remove them from. If it were me, I would remove them from my "Casino Directory" but leave them on my "SportsBook Directory".

Beyond that, I basically agree with everything he said. 5Dimes should definitely clarify their wording in their rules.

 

[PatrickMcIrish]

Okay Halifax, thanks for that information as I hadn't read it. Like I said you are one that I know calls it like he sees it so I certainly respect your view, fact is we won't always agree though. Just the way it is.

I admit to a certain degree of impatience towards these books on "rule changes". CRIS suddenly classifies a guy as a wiseguy and steals his bonus. BoDog allows a player to play on funds he sent them but later stiffs him after he wins 6k claiming a box was checked wrong. Later we hear the exact same thing happened to others who lost but in those cases BoDog continues on and clears the funds? The only difference is if a player won or lost? More and more I see shots taken at players so I am getting more and more tired of rules being changed to keep from paying someone. Not to mention the out and out thieves who have stolen the players money recently. More needs to be done for the players for us to have a chance off-shore. Now I hear "well yes he was active and waited 30 days but he was not active enough, we are forced to keep his bonus".

Plus it turns me off the whole disrespect thrown at bonus hunters from this book. They bitch and moan about them but at the same time roll out the red carpet for them? I don't know maybe it's just me but I am tired of books that selectively enforce and interpret rules. Each time the rules are interpreted in the books favor, never the players. That's my problem with this one, we are rewarding this book for having ambiguous rules. If I am honest had I done what this man would have done I would have expected to have gotten paid, that's why to me I think it's the right thing to say.

Anyway peace, talk to you later.