Self-exclusion from all online casinos! (page 7)

That's why so many of your cases are piling up unsolved, you don't have a casino.

You on the other hand seem to be their protectors in many cases.

You don't even understand the mediator's perspective and position.

With common sense, your job is simply to bring the two parties together so their problems can be publicly discussed.

Let them debate let the public judge so the public knows.

And when you want to be a mediator, the first rule is that a little evidence is the key to solving the problem.

Yes, that's true, and I've already said that we have certain processes in place. We don't invite casinos into the conversation based on insufficient evidence or when we disagree with a player.

So players must also respect these things. If someone doesn't like it, they can turn to someone else.

The casino has allowed me to implement permanent self-exclusion. Is that not enough evidence?

Email confirmation is a valid agreement

You are instead asking for lesser evidence in the form of conversation.

I have proof of the conversation, and the casino is avoiding me, refusing to communicate, and blocking my account. This is because I'm escalating this case here.

They have no reason why I should be allowed to play again other than they have changed licenses.

It's your job to force them to be here. You give your ratings and you're responsible for them.

If you don't give a good rating I won't play there.

You should be responsible

Our job is not to force anyone to be here, so you are quite mistaken. What was required of you has already been stated. If you are unable to provide it, unfortunately your case will not be pursued further.