Casino Complaint Winningroom (Acquired by Mr Green) Account Closed

[Chipkin9]

Right. So where do I start with this one?

On the 10th of this August I tried to log into my Winningroom account to make a deposit and play and got greeted with the"Account Blocked, please contact support" message.

After my hour long (They really do deliberately leave you on hold throughout each exchange) and unpleasant chat with the very rude Ruby; I was informed of the following:

In February 2018 Mr Green have acquired Evoke Gaming and all it's brands, and since I have my Mr Green account self excluded since April this year then the decision has been made to close my Evoke Gaming becaue of, and I quote "Care for the Player".

Now all of this would have sat fine with me if I had have been: A) Informed of the takeover immediately and had my account closed in April (Absolutely fine) and B) They stopped milking deposits off me all this time before closing my account.

Apparently they take responsible gaming so seriously over there that they thought it was absolutely fine to take £152.25 in Skrill deposits and £70 through paysafe from April until August before closing my account.

Of course I feel this is absolute bullshit and asked for a refund on all of my deposits made since April (When I closed my Mr Green account).

I received an Email telling me this has been refused, since "This acquisition has no impact from a license perspective and both companies run under completely independent licenses. Nevertheless, as we take Responsible Gaming very seriously, we have decided to close self-excluded accounts across brands ahead of the legal obligation to do so."

So, right then. You have closed my account in line with Mr Greens policies before you have a legal obligation to do so?

But it's perfectly fine for you to also not inform me of this takeover immediately and close the account in April before your obligation to do so?

I'm not in the slightest bit happy with this.

Evoke Gaming/Winningroom did NOT inform thier customers of Mr Greens acquisition of all thier brands.

They as an entity completely denied me the opportunity as a responsible gamer to cease my deposits to thier casino immediately by contacting me in some form or manner about this acquisition.

There is no doubt that by being self excluded at Mr Green and by being made informed of the acquisition, that I would not have deposited a penny more; knowing all too well about non payments that use self exclusion as the reason of confiscation for the casino's excuse.

Where does that leave us as players?

Had I won £3k, I imagine they would have closed the account and then informed me of the takeover, refused my winnings under "Responsible Gaming"and refunded my deposits. It's a win win, cake and eat it situation for them, and they are no doubt exploiting this takeover.

Am I entirely in the wrong here thinking they should have informed me and closed my account in April and ceased taking deposits immediately?

Had they have done this, I would not have deposited there at all, and now they are using the excuse that they "Operate under a separate License" to portray like they are doing things responsibly, have operated responsibly and have abided by the rule book; which in fact they have not by withholding the knowledge of the takeover from thier playerbase.

Am I wrong in asking for my deposits back?

What do I do with this?

Just accept it?

 

[goatwack]

I'd have thought change of ownership is something that gets emailed, only right they should let players know!

Of course no one would have deposited knowing they were SEd across their brand, and yes had you won they'd be issuing a refund no doubt!

What about the Mr. Green rep? Maybe he can issue a statement here

 

[Chipkin9]

I'd have thought change of ownership is something that gets emailed, only right they should let players know!

Of course no one would have deposited knowing they were SEd across their brand, and yes had you won they'd be issuing a refund no doubt!

What about the Mr. Green rep? Maybe he can issue a statement here

He'll tell me to take it up with the Evoke gaming manager as they "Operate under different Licenses". Yet adopt thier policies before a legal obligation to.

I'm not angry about the closure, that's expected at some point with the brands merging. I'm angry that I was not informed and have been having deposits accepted when my account should have been closed in April at all of Evoke's brands when they had prior knowledge that accounts across both Mr Green and Evoke casinos would be adopting the same SE policies; and eventually be merging Licenses.

 

[Harry_BKK]

So they were taken over in Feb 18, you excluded in April 18 and they suddenly turn responsible in Aug 18. Ergo, between April - August where was their responsible thinking?

They either are or are not taking RG seriously. If they do then your SE should have been activated across all brands in April 18. Doing it now is a bit like a spit in the face: "We got a few more bucks, soon we will need to self-exclude him anyway, so let's do it now"

Evoke is a part of Mr. Green, separate license or not, it is a 100% subsidiary of Mr. Green and thus SE across the brands should have been applied.

GIG and Betit run on separate licenses as well and players are excluded across all brands. So why there, and not at Mr. Green/Winning Room?

On another note, Evoke wasn't doing well when Mr Green stepped in but I do love the spin from the CEO: "it will secure future growth" blablabla.

 

[Chipkin9]

So they were taken over in Feb 18, you excluded in April 18 and they suddenly turn responsible in Aug 18. Ergo, between April - August where was their responsible thinking?

They either are or are not taking RG seriously. If they do then your SE should have been activated across all brands in April 18. Doing it now is a bit like a spit in the face: "We got a few more bucks, soon we will need to self-exclude him anyway, so let's do it now"

Evoke is a part of Mr. Green, separate license or not, it is a 100% subsidiary of Mr. Green and thus SE across the brands should have been applied.

GIG and Betit run on separate licenses as well and players are excluded across all brands. So why there, and not at Mr. Green/Winning Room?

On another note, Evoke wasn't doing well when Mr Green stepped in but I do love the spin from the CEO: "it will secure future growth" blablabla.

Precisely. And they are trying to cover thier arses with the "We operate under a separate license" bullshit. I loved that they communicated to me that they had no obligation to close my account but did so out of "Care for the player".

So much "Care for the player" in fact that they did not inform thier player database of the takeover in February like they had a due dilligence to and continued to milk deposits off them, knowing full well that SE players from Mr Green would and should be SE from all Evoke brands in the very near future.

They argued that a merging license "Doesn't happen overnight" and this is why they didn't implement the account closure sooner. I thought that if Mr Green acquired Evoke in February, then in February Evoke would have had Mr Greens player database that same month. The process of this is as simple as backing up your hard drive and copying everything onto it (New system).

And regardless of whether or not they had access to Mr Green player base in February or not, there are no excuses what so ever for not informing your own entire playerbase about the acquisition to begin with. Something that is inexcusable.

They refuse to acknowlegde my legitimate arguments for a refund and have an excuse for absolutely everything. Who'd have thought a casino would pull such stunts?

Unironically as everyone here on this CM has witnessed in the past, there is a very real possibility that they would have refused to payout any substantial winnings should I have been lucky, and also would have used "Self Exclusion".

I don't see why they should have thier cake and eat it too.

 

[slotter999]

@Chipkin9 I think that technically they do not have to refund your deposits. I understand that self exclusions are license specific. They just decided to close your account based on their own policy and not any legal requirement. Likewise, if you had won 3K I do not believe they would have been able to legally confiscate your funds.

That said. I recently went through a process where my account was closed down due to a similar situation. Leovegas were the parent company who took over some casino I had SE'd from and applied SE well after the acquisition. The odd thing is that leovegas never shared any licence but they still proceeded to refund all deposits within 24hrs. I was surprised they did it at the time as I thought they were not legally required to do so but given they had recently take a bit of a ''kick up the arse' by the regulator I think they just wanted rid of the issue which makes sense.

If you contact the UKGC they can provide clarity on your situation but I don't think you have a slam dunk for any refunds I'm afraid.

 

[Chipkin9]

@Chipkin9 I think that technically they do not have to refund your deposits. I understand that self exclusions are license specific. They just decided to close your account based on their own policy and not any legal requirement. Likewise, if you had won 3K I do not believe they would have been able to legally confiscate your funds.

That said. I recently went through a process where my account was closed down due to a similar situation. Leovegas were the parent company who took over some casino I had SE'd from and applied SE well after the acquisition. The odd thing is that leovegas never shared any licence but they still proceeded to refund all deposits within 24hrs. I was surprised they did it at the time as I thought they were not legally required to do so but given they had recently take a bit of a ''kick up the arse' by the regulator I think they just wanted rid of the issue which makes sense.

If you contact the UKGC they can provide clarity on your situation but I don't think you have a slam dunk for any refunds I'm afraid.

Thanks Slotter.

Unfortunately I do agree with you that they don't technically have to budge with thier "Different License" approach on the matter. As scummy as I think they have been by witholding the acquisition from thier players in the first place with the intention of getting more deposits from the soon to be excluded players, I do admit that they have possibly followed regulations with regards to closing my account prior to the full on License merge.

That doesn't mean I agree with it, and I don't. I feel the exclusion should have come sooner, there is no excuse as to why it did not. I feel I should have been informed of the takeover in February (When it occured), and again in April when I closed my Mr Green account. So I do feel like I was entitled to ask for a refund.

I've considered contacting the UKGC about it, but like you say, I probably shouldn't expect anything but a reply and some disappointment on the side

 

[dunover]

I actually agree with the OP that given the circumstances it was unreasonable to accept deposits then retain them via an ex post facto decision, especially as the player had no information e-mailed that this takeover had occurred.

 

[sapit222]

Of course you will get your deposits back.
There is nothing else to say about it.

Greedy casinos... :axeman2:

 

[lockinlove]

The deposits have to be returned because they were freerolling the player. And the casino should have done this without having to be asked.

 

[Slottery]

@Chipkin9 I think that technically they do not have to refund your deposits. I understand that self exclusions are license specific. They just decided to close your account based on their own policy and not any legal requirement. Likewise, if you had won 3K I do not believe they would have been able to legally confiscate your funds.

That said. I recently went through a process where my account was closed down due to a similar situation. Leovegas were the parent company who took over some casino I had SE'd from and applied SE well after the acquisition. The odd thing is that leovegas never shared any licence but they still proceeded to refund all deposits within 24hrs. I was surprised they did it at the time as I thought they were not legally required to do so but given they had recently take a bit of a ''kick up the arse' by the regulator I think they just wanted rid of the issue which makes sense.

If you contact the UKGC they can provide clarity on your situation but I don't think you have a slam dunk for any refunds I'm afraid.

I would assume pretty much same, there can be some difference between MGA and UKGC rulings, @Chipkin9 mentioned £ as in deposit amounts and assuming you are from UK (with my Google skills i count Tyrone to be in Northern Ireland), UKGC rulings are more tough for casinos and more player friendly (let's leave SOW outside of this where they were much faster than MGA ), there at least some groups (like @Harry_BKK pointed out) who have been acquiring other brands, are making self-exclusions through all sites even they are holding same license, not sure if this is requirement from UKGC or they just do it, i would find that out from UKGC to start with. With MGA self-exclusions need to be made only cross same license.

I also would guess that paying your winnings wouldn't be a problem if self-excluding your account was just their decision to try be responsible and it was only done now, but would really find out were they forced to by UKGC rules or was it really their own decision, that's kind of key point here. Like @slotter999 got refunded from Leovegas even license was not shared

100% agree to that all players should be informed such a change and at least no player should realized that account is self-excluded without any notification. If they are right in this different license thing, there really is not much chance to claim any deposits back but way how but if they are not, they might have nice pile of refunds because of this.

 

[LadyJelena]

Have you already messaged @Mr Green Affiliates ?

 

[Chipkin9]

Have you already messaged @Mr Green Affiliates ?

I have yes, just as you mentioned it

Let's see what he has to say.

 

[Mr Green representative]

Good Morning,

Thanks a lot for your posts and comments. I have passed this conversation to the relevant department and they will be in contact asap. Thank you and have a good day

 

[alexking12k]

Good Morning,

Thanks a lot for your posts and comments. I have passed this conversation to the relevant department and they will be in contact asap. Thank you and have a good day

I have a feeling that you are full of shit!

 

[colinsunderland]

The deposits have to be returned because they were freerolling the player. And the casino should have done this without having to be asked.

How were they freerolling the player?

 

[The Dude]

I have a feeling that you are full of shit!

What the hell? 30 day suspension.

This is not your issue, and making disparaging remarks like that might jeopardize the outcome of Chipkin's problem.

 

[pinnit2014]

Just chipping in (pun not intended) - was the same with LV and Royal Panda. I got the response from UKGC that, as different licences, there was no obligation on RP for example to return deposits of SE at LV at the SE doesn’t carry overetc. Later on RP decided to apply the LV SE etc months after takeover (policy decision?). Whether they do seems to be entirely at their discretion (whether that creates some sort of constructive obligation I don’t know).

The Mr Green acquisition appeared to go relatively unnoticed - maybe we need to subscribe to the Financial Times to keep informed ;-)

 

[Chipkin9]

How were they freerolling the player?

Whilst I wish to avoid arguing on the topic; this is exactly how I feel on the matter Colin.

Evoke/Winningroom were acquired in February. They did not inform thier customers of this acquisition.

I S/E at MrGreen in April. Had I known that Evoke/Winningroom were now owned by MrGreen, then I would have ceased my depoists there from April to August to avoid any possible future conflict regarding non payments due to S/E.

There are absolutely no guarantess that I would have been paid out at Winningroom while being S/E at MrGreen.

They eventually closed my account before a complete Licecnse merge and informed me it was due to "Care for the Player" and being a "Responsible Operator", yet they weren't responsible enough to inform thier customers of the acquisition.

They knew that Self Excluded players at Mr Green would have ceased playing at thier casinos and deliberatley witheld this information; that to me is freerolling players and taking advantage of responsible gamblers like myself who wouldn't have deposited a penny more.

If they operated responsibly as a casino, then they would have closed my account in April and informed me of the acquisition when I closed my Mr Green account, yet they didn't.

The argument they are making against refunding me is that they didn't have to close my account in August, but they did because they are "Responsible", so then what was stopping them from closing my account in April?

Why didn't they close it then?

So in my mind they definitely were not acting or operating responsibly, they were simply witholding information and freerolling me.

 

[colinsunderland]

I'm completely agree that you are right to be annoyed with them, I certainly would be, but I do think, had you won, you would have been paid, so don't think they were freerolling you. It would be different if they were operating under MrGreens license as then they would have had to SE from the earlier date.
You most certainly should have been told about the merger, even if only from a data protection view, as obviously your data will now be handled by a new company, so not sure how they have done that without getting your permission first.
Will be interesting to see what the rep comes back with

 

[Chipkin9]

I'm completely agree that you are right to be annoyed with them, I certainly would be, but I do think, had you won, you would have been paid, so don't think they were freerolling you. It would be different if they were operating under MrGreens license as then they would have had to SE from the earlier date.
You most certainly should have been told about the merger, even if only from a data protection view, as obviously your data will now be handled by a new company, so not sure how they have done that without getting your permission first.
Will be interesting to see what the rep comes back with

They way I also look at it; separate License or not...Evoke/Winningroom are owned by Mr Green, and it's into Mr Greens pocket my money went. That's me looking at it very simply

 

[colinsunderland]

They way I also look at it; separate License or not...Evoke/Winningroom are owned by Mr Green, and it's into Mr Greens pocket my money went. That's me looking at it very simply

I agree and also think, regardless of how many licenses are involved, if you SE from a casino, then it should apply instantly to any casinos they own, even if they have separate licenses. However, the UKGC seems to feel differently so we just have to go by the rules that are there unfortunately

 

[Mr Green representative]

Good morning all,

Please for security reasons contact our Customer Service department on [email protected], you need to email from your reg email account so we can bring up your account and locate the player. Our support agents will make sure your complaints are taken care off. Thank you

 

[Chipkin9]

Good morning all,

Please for security reasons contact our Customer Service department on [email protected], you need to email from your reg email account so we can bring up your account and locate the player. Our support agents will make sure your complaints are taken care off. Thank you

Hi MGA,

I've contacted customer services and have been replied to that complaints are taken seriously and may require some time to conclude, so I am just awaiting the outcome of that.

I must say, I am not optimistic in the slightest and am expecting the same company line response I got from Evoke Gaming (Winningroom). Let's see

Thanks for your assistance either way

 

[EkJR]

Interested to see the outcome of this as had a similar case of being excluded on Ladbrokes but being able to play at Coral. They denied a refund because they operate on separate licences but are one and the same company.

 

[Chipkin9]

Okay...So I got a response from Mr Green customer service.

My response was from Dennis who handled my complaint at Evoke Gaming (Winningroom). So Evoke Gaming and Mr Green have the same complaints team and all he did was refer me back to how he handled my complaint in the inital instance at Winning Room.

Basically telling me I won't be refunded.

So that's that. Operators where players are excluded can now go around and buyout brands, withold the knowledge of these acquisitions from thier player base and freeroll deposits off these excluded players and bypass the rules and regulations of Responsible Gaming set out by commissions.

Absolute horeshit in my opinion

Edit: I also can't help but think it's a big joke to Mr Green...the way the rep here told me to contact Mr Green customer service as a resolution, knowing full well I would get a response from Dennis from Evoke Gaming.

Great!

 

[Chipkin9]

Interested to see the outcome of this as had a similar case of being excluded on Ladbrokes but being able to play at Coral. They denied a refund because they operate on separate licences but are one and the same company.

Yea and they also would have refused to pay you any big cashouts. At that point they would have given you your refunds. They get away with absolute blue murder and this shit shouldn't be allowed to happen.

They always have a loophole.

 

[EkJR]

Have you checked your consumer rights? You may be able to raise a case with them.

 

[Chipkin9]

Have you checked your consumer rights? You may be able to raise a case with them.

Sorry to sound dumbish.

I know of consumer rights, but who would I raise a case with in regards to this?

I was thinking of making a complaint to the UKGC as I think an ADR would not produce the desired outcome since Mr Green are being completely stubborn and self assured in this whole matter.

Dennis also had the smug arrogance to provide me with details of an ADR service (IBAS) knowing Mr Green will not be budging. So I think that leaves the UKGC as my only option now and sadly they'll do FA .

 

[EkJR]

Trading Standards. Just Google them.

UKGC look at things from a regulatory point and don't deal with individual cases. I know as I have spoken to them lately. If you can provide evidence to them that the exclusion policy on Mr Green wasn't followed correctly and only retrospectively applied then they may raise a case against the operator. No guarantees of anything though.

 

[Chipkin9]

Actually considering an ADR afterall.

Can someone confirm if my complaint should be made toward Mr Green as the owner of Evoke Gaming in this case?

My issue stems from the fact that Mr Green have been exploiting me through one of thier subsudiaries and accepting deposits from me when I've been Self Excluded at thier main site Mr Green. So I'm not entirely sure because they have thier separate license loophole.

So who should I make an ADR against?

 

[EkJR]

Actually considering an ADR afterall.

Can someone confirm if my complaint should be made toward Mr Green as the owner of Evoke Gaming in this case?

My issue stems from the fact that Mr Green have been exploiting me through one of thier subsudiaries and accepting deposits from me when I've been Self Excluded at thier main site Mr Green. So I'm not entirely sure because they have thier separate license loophole.

So who should I make an ADR against?

Is it IBAS? If so you need to put your case to them as clearly and open as possible, lots of info. They are the best ADR imo in terms of understanding of player issues.

You would be doing it against Evoke

 

[Chipkin9]

Is it IBAS? If so you need to put your case to them as clearly and open as possible, lots of info. They are the best ADR imo in terms of understanding of player issues.

You would be doing it against Evoke

That was the ADR service Mr Green informed me of aye. Whether or not I use them or someone else I haven't decided. I am aware that they don't have to discuss anything with anyone else, but they are legally obliged to be signed up to one ADR service and IBAS is thiers.

I'll definitely need a few days to formulate a coherent dispute as possible. What a shitty feeling and position it feels like to be in right now

 

[EkJR]

That was the ADR service Mr Green informed me of aye. Whether or not I use them or someone else I haven't decided. I am aware that they don't have to discuss anything with anyone else, but they are legally obliged to be signed up to one ADR service and IBAS is thiers.

I'll definitely need a few days to formulate a coherent dispute as possible. What a shitty feeling and position it feels like to be in right now

Check out the ADR service on here as well.

 

[Chipkin9]

Check out the ADR service on here as well.

Yea I know, cheers buddy. Been here as a member 5 years and haven't had to use it yet. Whatever issues I have had in the past I have learned from here and had them resolved through either the Casino directly, and if that failed the few Reps I have had to contact here sorted the minor issues.

I don't know why, but I feel a slight bit of embarrassment about using it, even though I feel I am within my grounds.

 

[EkJR]

Yea I know, cheers buddy. Been here as a member 5 years and haven't had to use it yet. Whatever issues I have had in the past I have learned from here and had them resolved through either the Casino directly, and if that failed the few Reps I have had to contact here sorted the minor issues.

I don't know why, but I feel a slight bit of embarrassment about using it, even though I feel I am within my grounds.

Are you Scottish mate?

Anyway I think your concerns are legitimate. I might rekindle my old Ladbrokes Coral issue as well actually as they are the same company. Ethically corrupt they are.

Imo one part of a company exclusion should apply across all parts of the business. You can't have instances where your excluded on company a and not on company a1 as it creates these issues. They sound like they are not playing ball but why don't you find out the outright owners of the group and email them about it before going down the ADR route?

 

[Chipkin9]

Are you Scottish mate?

Anyway I think your concerns are legitimate. I might rekindle my old Ladbrokes Coral issue as well actually as they are the same company. Ethically corrupt they are.

Imo one part of a company exclusion should apply across all parts of the business. You can't have instances where your excluded on company a and not on company a1 as it creates these issues. They sound like they are not playing ball but why don't you find out the outright owners of the group and email them about it before going down the ADR route?

Irish

Basically what is being allowed to happen is the companies are being allowed to circumvent Gambling Authorites' regulations on Responsible Gaming by holding separate Licenses. It's deifintely not on in my opinion, and I also feel you should to pursue your own issue in regards to this.

If we as players allow it to happen, they will continue to exploit excluded players through thier other subsidiaries. Only we can change that.

I'm doing my best to avoid the ADR route for now.

 

[colinsunderland]

Irish

Basically what is being allowed to happen is the companies are being allowed to circumvent Gambling Authorites' regulations on Responsible Gaming by holding separate Licenses. It's deifintely not on in my opinion, and I also feel you should to pursue your own issue in regards to this.

And thats the problem you have, they are allowed to do it, I honestly can't see you getting anywhere with this unfortunately. I totally agree with you that it should be applied across both licenses, but legally they don't have to, so I can't see any ADR siding with you as they haven't done anything legally wrong. If, however, you could find evidence they have confiscated balances or not paid withdrawals for this reason, then your case would be MUCH stronger

 

[Chipkin9]

And thats the problem you have, they are allowed to do it, I honestly can't see you getting anywhere with this unfortunately. I totally agree with you that it should be applied across both licenses, but legally they don't have to, so I can't see any ADR siding with you as they haven't done anything legally wrong. If, however, you could find evidence they have confiscated balances or not paid withdrawals for this reason, then your case would be MUCH stronger

Cheers Colin, your input is appreciated and as usual spot on.

I've contacted the UKGC and made a complaint about why this is allowed to happen. This is the end of the matter for me and I won't bother with the ADR.

Just a shame Gambling Authorities leave loopholes for Operators. They must know that players will be taken advantage of in these cases and simply don't care.

I think thier rules on RG are more for the casino's benefit than ours...as Casino's can simply refuse to payout to Self Excluded players. Surprise Surprise

 

[SpinUk]

Trading standards and chargeback.

 

[Borgie]

Trading standards and chargeback.

Be careful with chargeback

 

[colinsunderland]

Trading standards and chargeback.

I'm sorry, but for what reason?

 

[Chipkin9]

Be careful with chargeback

My deposits were via Paysafe and Skrill anyway between April-August, so I couldn't even if I wanted to

Even if my deposits were made via my Visa I still would have no intention of doing this...only under exceptional circumstances, like me taking a knock to the head and depositing to some rogue outfit would I ever intend to do this, or a casino refusing to payout with no justifiable reason.

I'm sure there are other scenarios where Chargebacks could and should be considered and carried out, but unfortunately this is not one of them I feel.

So not to sound like I am contradicting myself, but I do both feel that I am entirely wihin my rights to ask for a refund given that I was not informed of the takeover and Mr Greens pocket was still being filled with my deposits while being SE, and also that as Colin has alluded to, they actually haven't operated against any regulations, since the UKGC allow them to have a separate License and there are no grounds for a chargeback.

So all in all, perhaps my fight should be against the UKGC for allowing this to begin with instead of Mr Green/Evoke Gaming. C'est La vie I guess.

 

[alexking12k]

What the hell? 30 day suspension.

This is not your issue, and making disparaging remarks like that might jeopardize the outcome of Chipkin's problem.

The hell was that for? The OP got flat out screwed by this casino, I call them out on it and I get a 30 day suspension? Interesting logic.

 

[Playford7]

Be careful with chargeback

Id completely agree.
Before I was a full member here and didn’t know my way around casinos and how to behave properly I made one single chargeback, to this day it still causes me issues.
A chargeback should only be used if the casino is totally proven to be rogue.

 

[Playford7]

The hell was that for? The OP got flat out screwed by this casino, I call them out on it and I get a 30 day suspension? Interesting logic.

Possibly the manner in which you addressed the problem caused the issue.

 

[dunover]

The hell was that for? The OP got flat out screwed by this casino, I call them out on it and I get a 30 day suspension? Interesting logic.

Maybe, but the rep is trying to his job on the OP's behalf and as members here generally benefit from the accredited/rep system it doesn't help speaking to them in that manner - whatever your viewpoint on the subject.
"Sorry, I don't believe a word of it" as opposed to "I have a feeling you're full of shit" wouldn't have raised an eyebrow let alone the ban hammer. Just sayin'

 

[alexking12k]

Maybe, but the rep is trying to his job on the OP's behalf and as members here generally benefit from the accredited/rep system it doesn't help speaking to them in that manner - whatever your viewpoint on the subject.
"Sorry, I don't believe a word of it" as opposed to "I have a feeling you're full of shit" wouldn't have raised an eyebrow let alone the ban hammer. Just sayin'

Potato - potahto!

 

[alexking12k]

Possibly the manner in which you addressed the problem caused the issue.

Potato - potahto