Looks unprofessional for doing such thing. Because that means they are lacking with knowledge on the business they are operating.

Maybe its good for whoever own this site to know lot of things about their casino, so they won't rely on Ai providing replies to people asking questions.

If they continue to do that and ignore this suggestions. Many people will not going to play in their casino, because they might get disappointed on how they handle this thread. First impression is always important and I think they would fail to impressed people base on the actions they have done here.

Good point, Kavelj22, That's exactly why we've already removed that rule
You're totally right, it makes no sense to penalize someone just because they're away for a bit





Hello DYING_S0UL,

About License, no Costa Rica registration is not an iGaming license, It is simply a corporate registration, we are operating under this structure while we work towards securing a proper license, we've been 100% transparent about this from the start.

VPN and restricted countries, we do not restrict VPN usage, our platform is built for privacy, so players are free to use a VPN.

About AI responses,  we don't use it to generate our forum replies every message here is written by us, ბut yes, of course we use AI tools in our day-to-day operations and workflow, just like pretty much every tech company today.

Hope that clears things up 🙏

Appreciate you breaking that down, panjul07, and looking at it objectively. 💙

That said, based on the community's overall feedback, we've actually decided to remove/revise this specific inactivity fee clause entirely. Even though the original intent was just to manage dormant accounts responsibly, we want to make sure our terms leave zero room for misunderstanding and remain fully player-friendly.

Thanks for the fair take.






Thanks for pointing that out, negotiation4.

Just to clarify, multi-account and related-party clauses are standard across the industry primarily to prevent bonus abuse and syndicate multi-accounting, rather than targeting regular players. However, we completely agree that vague wording can cause unnecessary confusion.

As we're currently reviewing our terms to make them as player-friendly and transparent as possible, we'll definitely take a close look at refining this clause too. Appreciate the eagle-eyed review.

I cant also understand why this term is taken as something bad by some people until thinking about the casino making scam accusations against players because of this terms is not making any senses.
The terms is clear enough, as what is written that the casino will try to contact the account first before starting to charge the inactivity fee or before the account is considered as inactive.
If we read and understand the term properly, this term or to be more specific the inactivity is simply applied for dormant account with some balance only. dormant accounts without any balance do not need to worry about this term because the casino has nothing to charge.

Hello Zwei, thanks for chiming in,

Just to reiterate what we mentioned earlier, public addresses or gateway routers spotted on-chain do not represent our operational treasury or total liquidity. As a crypto-native platform, we manage our liquidity across cold storage and dedicated routing structures for security reasons.

Regarding the inactivity fee and terms mentioned: we hear you loud and clear. We are currently reviewing and updating our Terms of Use to ensure they are fully aligned with player-friendly, fair standards. Our goal is to build a platform based on trust, and we're actively working on refining these clauses right now based on community feedback.

We completely understand why transparency is a major talking point for new platforms, and we're continuously working on improving how we present our operational strength without compromising security.
Appreciate you keeping the discussion active. 💙






Appreciate the perspective, Kavelj22, You're definitely right that most players skip the fine print, which is why we're taking another look at those terms to make sure everything is clear and fair for everyone.

Regarding the wallet side of things, keeping operational treasury and storage addresses private is standard industry practice for security and risk management. Publicly exposing primary liquidity pools just invites unnecessary targets, which is why we keep our main funds structured safely behind the scenes.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. 💙

المفروض ان يكون الامر كذلك. المنطق يقول ان البرامج مفتوحة المصدر من المفترض ان تكون اكثر امانا من البرامج مغلقة المصدر، لكن للاسف الواقع عكس ذلك، و حتى لا اعمم، فعلى الاقل هناك حالات عديدة حدث فيها العكس.
ما حدث مع محفظة كولد كارد هو احد الامثلة على ذلك فهي مفتوحة المصدر لكن تم اختراقها.

technically you can count cards in online blackjack, but is it worth the time and money? absolutely fucking not. one will make more begging on the streets.
you will need to sit there for a shit amount of hours counting cards to find a shoe with a true count high enough to give you an edge, but you will only be able to make a few bets before they reshuffle after dealing 4 or 5 decks.

i'm kinda terrible at explaining this, so you can watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjiVpO1hlvk. it pretty much goes into all the details why online card counting is so ridiculous when a casino accuses someone of doing it.

the provider have all the table data, so they can calculate the true count for every hand and compare it to each player betting pattern.

they like to keep the "fraud" and "unfair edge" terms vague on purpose so they can bend them to use in all situations however they like.

Card counting is basically useless online for so many reasons. If a casino gives this excuse they simply don't want to pay, that's all. Just google it, everywhere you will find the same information because the games are set up the way that you can't make a profit counting cards, simple as that.
There is a HUGE difference between online BJ and real casino BJ.

There’s a post where the Winna representative gave a more detailed answer about card counting:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5562065.msg65911489#msg65911489

As far as I know, detection is handled by the service provider, such as Pragmatic, for example
That’s what they said

The TOS don’t mention anything specific about card counting, they only address it in general terms

هذا أمر جيد حقا ، أهم ما حصل بعد هذه المعمعة التي افتعلها مايكل سايلور هو أن السوق لم يتعد يتأثر بقرارات شركة استراتيجي سواء في البيع أو الشراء وهذا أمر جيد وصحي تماما للسوق.

هذا أفضل بكثير أن يكون السوق لامركزي بشكل كامل ولا يتأثر بقرارات أي شركة والشيء الجيد الآخر كم ذكر الأخ Kavelj22 هو أنه لم يحدث تلاعب بالسوق مع أن الكثيرين ظنوا أن هذه خطة سايلور للتلاعب بالسوق لكن حتى الآن يبدو أنه لايوجد شيء مع أن استراتيجي بالكميات الضخمة التي لديها من البيتكوين قادرة على التلاعب بالسوق.

Thank you for your comment and for sharing your perspective.
I think there may be a small misunderstanding. Right now, Bonus.Cloud isn’t a large company with different departments or a dedicated marketing team. It’s just two people building something we’re genuinely interested in.
At this stage, our goal is simply to find out whether this idea is useful to other people. We’re not trying to compete with AskGamblers or other established platforms. We just want to make casino bonuses easier to understand by explaining their terms and conditions in a simpler way.
If we see that the project is valuable to the community, we’ll naturally invest more time and resources into it, including expanding the team.
In any case, thank you for the advice. We’ll definitely keep it in mind as the project grows.