He will certainly have kept his mouth shut when he was let in and if he had won he would have left without a word
It won't happen, but it could trigger a wave of lawsuits. Player sues hall wants money back and damages because he was let in. Hall blames the authorities for incorrect data. The authorities deny responsibility and claim that Halle did not adhere to the OASIS blocking system. Halle pays the player his money back, but sues the authority for possible lost revenue. So everyone sues everyone else and a tricky situation arises, oh dear🤣
Yes she let you in and I'm sure you quickly found out that gambling works too. At that moment you could/must have ended your "test". But you kept playing and now you want your money back 😂
I actually reached the arcade operator and he said that I will actually get the money back but wants to sue me for fraud, I can only say that he won't get away with it anyway.
apart from the specific case here, i ask myself what the point of the whole system is if it doesn't work?
it's there so that people who are really addicted or at Risk can protect themselves and be protected.
in my opinion, it's the only real point of the unhappiness contract that makes sense. and if it doesn't work, that's just downright shabby.
but if it does work and the operator doesn't give a damn, then the question of guilt is clear to me.
Extra_Leiner wrote on 10.04.2024 at 20:30: I actually reached the arcade operator he said that I will actually get the money back but wants to sue me for fraud can only say that he won't get away with it anyway.
just take it easy yesterday and today or spin 20€ in a Curacao booth, I think it would have been more relaxed for everyone involved than your Spielo project
The question is, when he was let in, did he mention directly that he was actually banned? How would the supervisor know about the mistake? They can only check the data
Yes, but they didn't, otherwise the block would have been displayed
With Oasis there is no error, at most the thing is offline for maintenance like we had recently and then there is a corresponding notice and new customers who are not yet in the store have to wait point
Letting people play without checking is stupid because you can't blame an addict (and only these are usually in there) if he tries to play out of addiction pressure! It's the same breaking out of prison is not a crime because you have a natural urge to be free, it's just that crimes are usually committed during the escape, such as damage to property if you break your cell door
@TE
You should urgently convey that you are the most addicted gambler in the world because if you are not, it is 100000000 % fraud
But seriously, why on earth would you want to test something like that? What's the point of testing a system that's been working well for years and only affects gambling addicts who need a break? Doesn't make any sense
Wouldn't you rather take a gambling hall hop that doesn't play by the rules? Was that possibly your trusted arcade after your ban due to Gambling addiction?
Donnie wrote on 10.04.2024 at 12:33: He will have kept his mouth shut when he was let in and if he had won he would have left without a word
Won't happen but could trigger a proper wave of lawsuits. Player sues Halle for money back and damages because he was let in. Hall blames the authorities for incorrect data. Authorities deny responsibility and claim that Halle did not adhere to the OASIS blocking system. Halle pays the player his money back, but sues the authority for possible lost revenue. So everyone sues everyone else and a tricky situation arises, oh dear🤣
Extra_Leiner wrote on 10.04.2024 at 20:30: I actually reached the arcade operator he said that I will actually get the money back but wants to sue me for fraud can only say he won't get away with it anyway.
Now everyone is really suing everyone and no one can just get out of the situation. That's what I call a "Mexican standoff" 😂😂
Player has locked himself out and is let in anyway --> hall has violated its duty of supervision.
Player is entitled to a refund.
Wanting to sue the player for fraud is nonsense. You first have to prove that a player wanted to profit financially from it. Hard to prove. Just like with rear-end collisions. Without a Dash cam, the person who caused the accident is the one who ends up paying (or their Insurance company). As long as you can't prove the provocation - the claim won't go through.
If the server is unavailable (offline), then no new players should be allowed in. This is also the case online. As soon as there is an OASIS maintenance, the pages are taken down. You can no longer log in to place bets. If the hall then thinks it can let players in despite maintenance or similar, then it is, to put it bluntly, their own fault. Suing an authority is a waste of money.
Extra_Leiner wrote on 10.04.2024 at 10:31 am: Hello I have a question and I am in the OASIS and normally I am not allowed to go to arcades and play but yesterday I was playing and they let me play but I don't mean an online casino but actually an arcade I played on several machines everything went without problems can you get your money back? i played on 5 machines but not at the same time but always changed machines when one was on break. who do i have to contact now? and is it possible to get my money back? and what is the probability? Thanks in advance
frapi07 wrote on 11.04.2024 at 00:37: For me, the matter is clear.
...
Player is entitled to a refund.
For me, the matter is also clear: the player is not entitled to a refund (how much has been gambled? Who wants to prove that?) and the arcade owner receives a misdemeanor complaint, if anyone files one. The arcade operator files a charge of fraud against the player (which leads to nothing).
For me, the matter is also clear: the player has no right to a refund (how much has been gambled? Who wants to prove that?) and the arcade owner gets a misdemeanor complaint, if anyone files one. The arcade operator files a charge of fraud against the player (which leads to nothing).
Lump sum. You know for sure how long he was in there. You can put in €60 per hour per machine. It's only about one day or one time, not several times. It will be manageable how much the guy gambled away.
If the hall owner really does press charges against the "customer", then he's reporting himself and won't be doing himself any favors.
Played despite lockdown
Nobody has liked this post so far
It won't happen, but it could trigger a wave of lawsuits. Player sues hall wants money back and damages because he was let in. Hall blames the authorities for incorrect data. The authorities deny responsibility and claim that Halle did not adhere to the OASIS blocking system. Halle pays the player his money back, but sues the authority for possible lost revenue. So everyone sues everyone else and a tricky situation arises, oh dear🤣
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Liked this post:
Max_Bet
Short and sweet, crisply summarized😂😉
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Nobody has liked this post so far
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Nobody has liked this post so far
Then you got an answer.
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Liked this post:
needle34
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Nobody has liked this post so far
it's there so that people who are really addicted or at Risk can protect themselves and be protected.
in my opinion, it's the only real point of the unhappiness contract that makes sense. and if it doesn't work, that's just downright shabby.
but if it does work and the operator doesn't give a damn, then the question of guilt is clear to me.
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Nobody has liked this post so far
just take it easy yesterday and today or spin 20€ in a Curacao booth, I think it would have been more relaxed for everyone involved than your Spielo project
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Nobody has liked this post so far
Yes, but they didn't, otherwise the block would have been displayed
With Oasis there is no error, at most the thing is offline for maintenance like we had recently and then there is a corresponding notice and new customers who are not yet in the store have to wait point
Letting people play without checking is stupid because you can't blame an addict (and only these are usually in there) if he tries to play out of addiction pressure! It's the same breaking out of prison is not a crime because you have a natural urge to be free, it's just that crimes are usually committed during the escape, such as damage to property if you break your cell door
@TE
You should urgently convey that you are the most addicted gambler in the world because if you are not, it is 100000000 % fraud
But seriously, why on earth would you want to test something like that? What's the point of testing a system that's been working well for years and only affects gambling addicts who need a break? Doesn't make any sense
Wouldn't you rather take a gambling hall hop that doesn't play by the rules? Was that possibly your trusted arcade after your ban due to Gambling addiction?
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Nobody has liked this post so far
Now everyone is really suing everyone and no one can just get out of the situation. That's what I call a "Mexican standoff" 😂😂
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Liked this post:
Hanshanshans, 
Langhans, 
Saphira
I realize once again how lost we simply are .... you really can't make up such nonsense anymore haha
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Liked this post:
hustlehoff
Player has locked himself out and is let in anyway --> hall has violated its duty of supervision.
Player is entitled to a refund.
Wanting to sue the player for fraud is nonsense. You first have to prove that a player wanted to profit financially from it. Hard to prove. Just like with rear-end collisions. Without a Dash cam, the person who caused the accident is the one who ends up paying (or their Insurance company). As long as you can't prove the provocation - the claim won't go through.
If the server is unavailable (offline), then no new players should be allowed in. This is also the case online. As soon as there is an OASIS maintenance, the pages are taken down. You can no longer log in to place bets. If the hall then thinks it can let players in despite maintenance or similar, then it is, to put it bluntly, their own fault. Suing an authority is a waste of money.
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Nobody has liked this post so far
The story is so stupid, it can hardly be true.
Surely just another attention-seeking troll.
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Nobody has liked this post so far
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Nobody has liked this post so far
For me, the matter is also clear: the player is not entitled to a refund (how much has been gambled? Who wants to prove that?) and the arcade owner receives a misdemeanor complaint, if anyone files one. The arcade operator files a charge of fraud against the player (which leads to nothing).
This post has been translated automatically
Played despite lockdown
Nobody has liked this post so far
Lump sum. You know for sure how long he was in there. You can put in €60 per hour per machine. It's only about one day or one time, not several times. It will be manageable how much the guy gambled away.
If the hall owner really does press charges against the "customer", then he's reporting himself and won't be doing himself any favors.
Assuming, of course, that everything is true.
This post has been translated automatically