Kristiina,
Toivottavasti tämä viesti löytää sinut hyvin. Haluan ilmaista vilpittömät kiitollisuuteni kaikesta avusta, jota voit antaa, etenkin kun otetaan huomioon asian monimutkaisuus. Vaikka ymmärrän, että asiantuntemuksesi ei välttämättä liity suoraan lakialaan, uskon, että oikeudenmukaisuuden ja oikeudenmukaisuuden varmistaminen on kaikkien huolenaihe.
Insinöörinä logiikka ja selkeys ovat olennaisia lähestymistavassani ongelmanratkaisuun. Ennen bonuksen hyväksymistä olen tutustunut huolellisesti Twinin tarjoamiin ehtoihin. Vaikka ehdot, kuten talletettu summa (konseptitilin saldo), jäivät epäselväksi.
Twinin kohta 3, "Osallistuminen kampanjaan ja bonuspetos", kiinnitti huomioni erityisesti. Se viittaa siihen, että osallistumisesta vetäytyminen korvaa käsitteen A ja johtaa käsitteen Y menettämiseen. Käsitteen A tarkka luonne on kuitenkin edelleen epäselvä. Loogisen päättelyn avulla arvelin, että Twin on saattanut rinnastaa Concept Z:n konseptiin A, vaikkakin käyttämällä eri terminologiaa. Jos todellakin A=Z, Z:n nostaminen merkitsisi sen korvaamista ja Y:n menettämistä, mikä lopulta palaa talletettuun summaan (X), jonka pitäisi olla turvallista nostaa.
Huolimatta yrityksistäni selvittää nämä erot Twinin ehdoissa:
"1. Kohdassa 1.4 viitataan ensin käsitteeseen talletettu summa ja bonussumma, jota vahvistetaan myöhemmin kohdassa 1.5. Kohdan 1 lopussa on kuitenkin esitetty esimerkkejä, jotka perustuvat talletettuihin summiin, joissa "summa" on mainittu bonustili", joka määritellään bonuksesta tulevan summan ja talletetun summan summana.
2. Kohdassa 1.5 on selkeä ero bonussumman ja talletetun summan välillä, mikä osoittaa näiden kahden välisen eron. Tämä ero ei kuitenkaan ole enää ilmeinen myöhemmissä kohdissa, mikä voi hämmentää käyttäjää.
3. Kohdassa 2.2 erotetaan jälleen bonussumma ja talletettu summa esimerkkien avulla, jotka erottavat ne selvästi.
4. Kohdassa 2.6 esitellään bonustilin saldon ja päätilin saldon käsite, jotain uutta, joka aiemmin mainittiin vain summien eikä saldojen osalta. Ei kuitenkaan ole selvää, onko bonustilin saldo bonussumman ja talletetun summan summa.
5. Kohdassa 2.7 todetaan, että "Bonusrahaa käytetään, kunnes bonustili laskee alle 0,20 €". Tämä viittaa siihen, että bonusrahalla tarkoitetaan itse bonuksen tuottamaa rahaa, ei bonustilin saldon käsitettä. Tässä yhteydessä olisi ehkä tarkoituksenmukaisempaa käyttää termiä "bonustilin saldo", koska termit eivät ole selkeitä.
6. Kohdassa 3.1 on selitetty, että kampanjaan osallistumisesta vetäytyessä bonustilin saldo nollautuu, mikä johtaa saadun bonussumman menettämiseen.
7. Yllä oleva kohdassa 3.1 on ristiriidassa aiemmin käyttöön otettujen käsitteiden kanssa käyttämällä käsitettä saadun bonuksen arvo ja siten erottaen bonuksen ja talletuksen."
Päätös on jäänyt vaikeaksi. Opastustasi ja tukeasi tämän asian selvittämisessä arvostamme suuresti.
Auttamalla minua tässä asiassa et vain auta apua tarvitsevaa henkilöä, vaan myös vastustat epäoikeudenmukaisuutta ja väärinkäytöksiä. Tavoitteeni ei ole pelkästään rahallinen arvo, vaikka se edustaakin merkittävää osaa Portugalin vähimmäispalkasta. Kyse on oikeudenmukaisuuden ja vastuullisuuden periaatteiden noudattamisesta, periaatteista, jotka resonoivat organisaatiosi tehtävän kanssa.
Kuten Casino Guru perustellusti toteaa, puuttuminen, kun pelaajia kohdellaan epäoikeudenmukaisesti, on välttämätöntä. Valaisemalla sääntöjen noudattamatta jättämistä ja epärehellisyyttä edistämme oikeudenmukaisempaa ja avoimempaa pelialaa.
Kiitän teitä vilpittömästi pyyntöni huomioon ottamisesta ja odotan edelleen myönteistä ratkaisua.
Lämpimät terveiset
Kristina,
I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my sincere appreciation for any assistance you can provide, especially given the complexity of the issue. While I understand your expertise may not directly relate to the legal realm, I believe that ensuring justice and fairness is a concern for everyone.
As an engineer, logic and clarity are fundamental to my approach to problem-solving. Before accepting the bonus, I carefully reviewed the terms and conditions provided by Twin. While terms such as Deposited Amount (Concept Account Balance) remained ambiguous.
Twin's point 3, "Participation in the campaign and bonus fraud," particularly caught my attention. It suggests that withdrawing from participation replaces Concept A and results in the loss of Concept Y. However, the exact nature of Concept A remains unclear. Through logical deduction, I speculated that Twin may have equated Concept Z with Concept A, albeit using different terminology. If indeed A=Z, then withdrawing Z would imply replacing it and losing Y, ultimately returning to the deposited amount (X), which should be safe to withdraw.
Despite my efforts to clarify these discrepancies within Twin's terms and conditions:
"1. In point 1.4, the first reference is made to the concept of deposited amount and bonus amount, reinforced later in point 1.5. However, at the end of point 1, examples are presented based on deposited amounts, where an "amount" is mentioned bonus account", defined as the sum of the amount coming from the bonus and the amount deposited.
2. In point 1.5, there is a clear distinction between the bonus amount and the deposited amount, indicating a difference between the two. However, this distinction is no longer evident at later points, which can confuse the user.
3. In point 2.2, a distinction is made again between the bonus amount and the deposited amount, with examples that clearly differentiate them.
4. In point 2.6, the concept of bonus account balance and main account balance is introduced, something new that was previously only mentioned in terms of amounts and not balances. However, it is not clear whether the bonus account balance is the sum of the bonus amount and the deposited amount.
5. In point 2.7, it is stated that "Bonus money is used until the bonus account drops below €0.20". This suggests that bonus money refers to the money generated by the bonus itself, not the concept of the bonus account balance. It would perhaps be more appropriate to use the term "bonus account balance" in this context, given the lack of clarity in the terms.
6. In point 3.1, it is explained that when withdrawing from participation in the campaign, the bonus account balance will be reset, resulting in the loss of any bonus amount received.
7. The above in point 3.1 contradicts the concepts previously introduced, by using the concept of the value of the bonus received, and thus distinguishing between the amount of the bonus and the deposit."
A resolution remains elusive. Your guidance and support in navigating this matter would be greatly appreciated.
By assisting me in this matter, you'll not only be aiding an individual in need but also standing against injustice and misconduct. My aim isn't merely about the monetary value involved, although it does represent a significant portion of the minimum wage in Portugal. It's about upholding principles of fairness and accountability, principles that resonate with your organization's mission.
As Casino Guru rightfully states, intervening when players are treated unfairly is essential. By shedding light on instances of non-compliance and dishonesty, we contribute to a fairer and more transparent gaming industry.
I sincerely thank you for considering my request and remain hopeful for a positive resolution.
Warm regards
Kristina,
I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my sincere appreciation for any assistance you can provide, especially given the complexity of the issue. While I understand your expertise may not directly relate to the legal realm, I believe that ensuring justice and fairness is a concern for everyone.
As an engineer, logic and clarity are fundamental to my approach to problem-solving. Before accepting the bonus, I carefully reviewed the terms and conditions provided by Twin. While terms such as Deposited Amount (Concept X), Bonus Amount (Concept Y), and Bonus Account Amount (Concept Z, where Z=X+Y) were clear, definitions of Concept A (Bonus Account Balance) and Concept B (Main Account Balance) remained ambiguous.
Twin's point 3, "Participation in the campaign and bonus fraud," particularly caught my attention. It suggests that withdrawing from participation replaces Concept A and results in the loss of Concept Y. However, the exact nature of Concept A remains unclear. Through logical deduction, I speculated that Twin may have equated Concept Z with Concept A, albeit using different terminology. If indeed A=Z, then withdrawing Z would imply replacing it and losing Y, ultimately returning to the deposited amount (X), which should be safe to withdraw.
Despite my efforts to clarify these discrepancies within Twin's terms and conditions:
"1. No ponto 1.4, é feita a primeira referência ao conceito montante depositado e montante do bónus, reforçada posteriormente no ponto 1.5. No entanto, no final do ponto 1, são apresentados exemplos baseados nos montantes depositados, onde é mencionado um "montante da conta bónus", definido como a soma do montante proveniente do bónus e do montante depositado.
2. No ponto 1.5, há uma clara distinção entre o montante do bónus e o montante depositado, indicando uma diferença entre os dois. No entanto, essa distinção deixa de ser evidente em pontos posteriores, o que pode confundir o utilizador.
3. No ponto 2.2, é feita novamente uma distinção entre o montante do bónus e o montante depositado, com exemplos que os diferenciam claramente.
4. No ponto 2.6, é introduzido o conceito de saldo da conta bónus e saldo da conta principal, algo novo que antes só era mencionado em termos de montantes e não de saldos. No entanto, não fica claro se o saldo da conta bónus é a soma do montante proveniente do bónus e do montante depositado.
5. No ponto 2.7, é declarado que "o dinheiro do Bónus é utilizado até que a conta de bónus desça abaixo de 0.20€". Isto sugere que o dinheiro do bónus se refere ao dinheiro gerado pelo próprio bónus, não ao conceito de saldo da conta bónus. Talvez fosse mais apropriado utilizar o termo "saldo da conta bónus" neste contexto, dada a falta de clareza nos termos.
6. No ponto 3.1, é explicado que ao desistir da participação na campanha, ocorre a reposição do saldo da conta de bónus, resultando na perda de qualquer valor de bónus recebido.
7. O exposto no ponto 3.1 contradiz os conceitos previamente introduzidos, ao utilizar o conceito do valor do bónus recebido, e desta forma distinguir entre o montante do bónus e do depósito."
A resolution remains elusive. Your guidance and support in navigating this matter would be greatly appreciated.
By assisting me in this matter, you'll not only be aiding an individual in need but also standing against injustice and misconduct. My aim isn't merely about the monetary value involved, although it does represent a significant portion of the minimum wage in Portugal. It's about upholding principles of fairness and accountability, principles that resonate with your organization's mission.
As Casino Guru rightfully states, intervening when players are treated unfairly is essential. By shedding light on instances of non-compliance and dishonesty, we contribute to a fairer and more transparent gaming industry.
I sincerely thank you for considering my request and remain hopeful for a positive resolution.
Warm regards
Automaattinen käännös:
Ota AdBlock pois käytöstä