cristina,
Espero que este mensaje te encuentre bien. Quiero expresar mi más sincero agradecimiento por cualquier ayuda que puedan brindarme, especialmente dada la complejidad del tema. Si bien entiendo que su experiencia puede no estar directamente relacionada con el ámbito legal, creo que garantizar la justicia y la equidad es una preocupación para todos.
Como ingeniero, la lógica y la claridad son fundamentales para mi enfoque de resolución de problemas. Antes de aceptar el bono, revisé cuidadosamente los términos y condiciones proporcionados por Twin. Mientras que términos como Monto Depositado (Saldo de Cuenta Concepto) seguían siendo ambiguos.
Me llamó especialmente la atención el punto 3 de Twin, "Participación en la campaña y fraude de bonificaciones". Sugiere que retirarse de la participación reemplaza el Concepto A y resulta en la pérdida del Concepto Y. Sin embargo, la naturaleza exacta del Concepto A sigue sin estar clara. A través de la deducción lógica, especulé que Twin podría haber equiparado el Concepto Z con el Concepto A, aunque usando terminología diferente. Si efectivamente A=Z, entonces retirar Z implicaría reemplazarlo y perder Y, volviendo en última instancia a la cantidad depositada (X), que debería ser segura para retirar.
A pesar de mis esfuerzos por aclarar estas discrepancias dentro de los términos y condiciones de Twin:
"1. En el punto 1.4, la primera referencia se hace al concepto de monto depositado y monto de bonificación, reforzado más adelante en el punto 1.5. Sin embargo, al final del punto 1, se presentan ejemplos basados en montos depositados, donde un "monto" Se habla de cuenta de bono", definida como la suma del monto proveniente del bono y el monto depositado.
2. En el punto 1.5, hay una distinción clara entre el monto del bono y el monto depositado, indicando una diferencia entre ambos. Sin embargo, esta distinción ya no es evidente en puntos posteriores, lo que puede confundir al usuario.
3. En el punto 2.2 se vuelve a distinguir entre el importe del bono y el importe depositado, con ejemplos que los diferencian claramente.
4. En el punto 2.6 se introduce el concepto de saldo de cuenta de bonificación y saldo de cuenta principal, algo nuevo que anteriormente sólo se mencionaba en términos de montos y no de saldos. Sin embargo, no está claro si el saldo de la cuenta de bonificación es la suma del monto del bono y el monto depositado.
5. En el punto 2.7 se indica que "el dinero del bono se utiliza hasta que la cuenta del bono caiga por debajo de 0,20 €". Esto sugiere que el dinero del bono se refiere al dinero generado por el bono en sí, no al concepto de saldo de la cuenta del bono. Quizás sería más apropiado utilizar la expresión "saldo de cuenta de bonificación" en este contexto, dada la falta de claridad de los términos.
6. En el punto 3.1, se explica que al retirarse de la participación en la campaña, el saldo de la cuenta de bonificación se restablecerá, lo que resultará en la pérdida de cualquier monto de bonificación recibido.
7. Lo anterior en el punto 3.1 contradice los conceptos anteriormente introducidos, al utilizar el concepto de valor del bono recibido, distinguiendo así entre el importe del bono y el depósito."
Una resolución sigue siendo difícil de alcanzar. Se agradecería mucho su orientación y apoyo para resolver este asunto.
Al ayudarme en este asunto, no solo ayudará a una persona necesitada, sino que también se opondrá a la injusticia y la mala conducta. Mi objetivo no es sólo el valor monetario involucrado, aunque representa una parte significativa del salario mínimo en Portugal. Se trata de defender los principios de justicia y responsabilidad, principios que resuenan con la misión de su organización.
Como afirma acertadamente Casino Guru, es esencial intervenir cuando los jugadores reciben un trato injusto. Al arrojar luz sobre casos de incumplimiento y deshonestidad, contribuimos a una industria del juego más justa y transparente.
Sinceramente le agradezco que haya considerado mi solicitud y mantengo la esperanza de una resolución positiva.
Un cordial saludo
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
Traducción automática:
Deberías desactivar AdBlock