[edawg]

Agree that the bet should be paid in full because if not it sets a dangerous precedent. People stick up for the book because they know 5dimes is a legit shop.

[swordsandtequila]

Regardless what do you think of the situation that led up to this?

What a coincidence. Guy A. wagers on certain markets...and gets limited.. Withdraws via Bitcoin.

Guy B. suddenly creates an account, deposits with Bitcoin, wagers on the same markets (no longer limited due to new account), and gets caught. Oh and he just happened to wager from the same device Guy A. got limited from.

Yeah.. CALL ME CRAZY but something tells me there was shady crap going on here and I have no sympathy. How come we never hear of a case of clear "theft" from 5Dimes. Oh that's right, because it doesn't happen.

Do shady crap and don't complain when you get caught. I have no sympathy for these fools. Thank God for technology because this guy had no idea it could be tracked to the same device.

Not taking either side because I don't know all the facts, but a little reading comprehension is in order here. Been stated more than once OP didn't make the wager from the same device. Opened account on friends ipad, bet from home on own computer a week or so later. And the whole "wagered on same markets" argument is straight up bullshit. I mean, what are the odds 2 different people wager on an NFL side? Really. That would elimate 99% of bettors. The IP thing is a joke too, anybody who can use google can figure that out. Plaza23 is right, a book wants to set limits then set them system wide, not individual players. Don't want the player's action, don't give them an account.

5Dimes should give OP the opportunity to prove his identity (versus is "friend"), simple enough way to prove whether true or fraudulent. But then they stand the chance of losing...

[cloverfield]

And the whole "wagered on same markets" argument is straight up bullshit. I mean, what are the odds 2 different people wager on an NFL side? Really. ..

Same markets does not refer to the same team/bet. It means if Guy A. wagered on tennis totals, and Guy B. wagered on tennis totals on a totally different game, that's the same market. It refers to the type of wager in general. 5Dimes is saying that Guy A. was limited on a certain market and Guy B. wagered on that same exact market.

I'm not saying 5Dimes shouldn't pay this one particular wager...but you best believe this is not a "friend" situation IMHO. "Oh here sign up to 5Dimes on my iPad, oh here use Bitcoins (for $4000+ initial deposit...), oh here make the same type of wager, etc.". Smells like crap to me.

P.S How much did his "friend" withdraw via Bitcoins from 5Dimes? I might just die laughing if it's roughly $4500...around the same amount of this guys initial deposit.

[milwaukee mike]

industry standard is "you book the bet, you pay the bet"

doesn't matter how shady the guy is/was, he made a bet that was accepted and it won, not even sure what's being argued about

[cloverfield]

industry standard is "you book the bet, you pay the bet"

doesn't matter how shady the guy is/was, he made a bet that was accepted and it won, not even sure what's being argued about

Industry standard from the otherside must be to create a new account when you get limited. No problems with that though.

Sounds like I'm one of the few people who don't have my buddy sign in from my iPad to create a new account.
I can almost hear the conversation "Hey buddy you're not going to believe this, I created an account at 5Dimes, I wagered some, I got limited in my amounts...You should totally sign up, use Bitcoins, and wager on the same markets...it will be totally cool man. 5Dimes is awesome!!!!!!!"

The system worked...5Dimes knew about this crap right off the bat after the first wager.

[milwaukee mike]

Industry standard from the otherside must be to create a new account when you get limited. No problems with that though.

Sounds like I'm one of the few people who don't have my buddy sign in from my iPad to create a new account.
I can almost hear the conversation "Hey buddy you're not going to believe this, I created an account at 5Dimes, I wagered some, I got limited in my amounts...You should totally sign up, use Bitcoins, and wager on the same markets...it will be totally cool man. 5Dimes is awesome!!!!!!!"

The system worked...5Dimes knew about this crap right off the bat after the first wager.

who knows or cares exactly how it went down, doesn't matter

could've just as easily been him visiting buddy in vegas, wanting to bet on team xxx -110 and buddy says "why don't you bet it online you get reduced juice and save $200"

either way it's weird that people justify the book freerolling the player here

[unluckysob]

DUMB TO USE SAME COMPUTER, ip ADDRESS AS ANOTHER CUSTOMER AT SAME BOOK. People should think over every situation. What would give them an excuse NOT to pay me.---my buddy lives 3 miles from me, we have seperate accounts at same book---we never do business from each others house.

[SABAlove]

Cloverfield- So your position seems to be that ,despite ACTUALLY BEING two different people, the book can still retroactively keep winnings when it chooses to believe otherwise? Pretty interesting precedent.

[High3rEl3m3nt]

whoa...did I read that right...the bet was a NFL side? Given the amount, wasn't reduced juice either.

[edawg]

Can see both sides in this argument. Best solution would be to pay in full and no longer take any action from OP or his friend. Basically the same situation when a bet has been taken from a beard.

[cloverfield]

Cloverfield- So your position seems to be that ,despite ACTUALLY BEING two different people, the book can still retroactively keep winnings when it chooses to believe otherwise? Pretty interesting precedent.

I would vote, given they have substantial suspicion, return your initial deposit and suspend your account. Also I can see the side of paying out based on your "friends" wagering limits.
I'm just posting my opinion because we see this all the time.

You can never have me believe that your friend had his wager amounts limited, and soon after you just happened to sign up from his iPad and used Bitcoins as well. Your friend had his account limited yet he recommended the book to you to try out...and you were so interested you initially deposited $4800. I would LOVE to know how much your friend withdrew in Bitcoins before you deposited.

Your friend had quite the experience at 5Dimes being limited and all...but suggested you give them a shot. You had quite the faith in a shop that just limited your friend and deposited $4800. I don't believe it for a SECOND.

[High3rEl3m3nt]

You guys are getting hung up in the details. The real significance is that the OP made a NFL side bet. A side bet!

[SABAlove]

So your position seems to be that despite ACTUALLY BEING PROVABLY WRONG, the book should be allowed to keep winnings when it detects "suspicious behavior", without giving any advanced warning whatsoever as to what constitutes "suspicious behavior"? That's a pretty dangerous precedent.

And please, stop with the "wagers on the same markets" NONSENSE. I was not trying to make a play on Latvian Curling or WWE results. This was a straight bet on an NFL side. The entire wagering world has played in this "same market"

And yes, my buddy did recommend 5Dimes, said they were good, also said that they would lower your limits if you won too much. They didn't however, ban him or anything. Just felt his action was too big/sharp whatever and I guess tried to move him along. Fine.

Like I said before, I made some mistakes here. Raised "red flags" that I wasn't aware of. At any point, Tony could have backed me off, lowered limits, refused to open account, demanded verification, etc. I would have tried my best to reassure him, and let him make whatever call. That's his prerogative.

But booking the action and taking a freeroll is most definitely NOT his prerogative without me at least getting my $0.02 in.

You seem pretty quick to take the book's side if there's any "shady crap" going on. Try this: just for a second, assume that what I say is true, and put yourself in my shoes before you jump to your conclusions. Now who's pulling the "shady crap" ?

Regardless what do you think of the situation that led up to this?

What a coincidence. Guy A. wagers on certain markets...and gets limited.. Withdraws via Bitcoin.

Guy B. suddenly creates an account, deposits with Bitcoin, wagers on the same markets (no longer limited due to new account), and gets caught. Oh and he just happened to wager from the same device Guy A. got limited from.

Yeah.. CALL ME CRAZY but something tells me there was shady crap going on here and I have no sympathy. How come we never hear of a case of clear "theft" from 5Dimes. Oh that's right, because it doesn't happen.

Do shady crap and don't complain when you get caught. I have no sympathy for these fools. Thank God for technology because this guy had no idea it could be tracked to the same device.

[cloverfield]

You seem pretty quick to take the book's side if there's any "shady crap" going on. Try this: just for a second, assume that what I say is true, and put yourself in my shoes before you jump to your conclusions. Now who's pulling the "shady crap" ?

Hey "friend",

You must have missed my question:

Your friend had his account limited yet he recommended the book to you to try out...and you were so interested you initially deposited $4800. I would LOVE to know how much your friend withdrew in Bitcoins before you deposited.

[bocajuniorska]

how fkin stupid lol now we cant use our accounts while being out of home like on coffe shops because if someone in the past has logged in there and was limited then we will be limited too... Get real, even if this guy placed the bet for his friend, it was accepted, its a DIFFERENT PERSON so bookie has to pay him regardless and yes not take anymore bets from him obviously if proven so.

What the actual f*ck... Cant believe I see people defending the bookie.

[TheAntFather]

Seems like cloverfield and kraken work for 5dimes. But, in all honesty; the account should have came into question by 5dimes when this friend opened the account on the same device, not after a bet was placed, accepted and especially won. What was 5dimes waiting for?? For the actual BET to lose before they took action?

Now, I have no problem with 5dimes as I play there and have been paid $3k in the last 2 weeks with no problem. But, if they keep this guys winnings; then that will set a very bad precedent. I have a couple of friends that live within a 5 mile radius of me that have a 5dimes account; does this mean if I placed a bet from my account from my friends phone because my phone battery died, that 5dimes has the RIGHT to now Freeroll the bet? 5dimes accepted the bet and waited until the results of the game to finally take action?

I say 5dimes should pay the guy his money, then they can limit him or horse collar him or anal probe him and close his account if they want to. But, the FACT of the matter is that 5dimes allowed the account to be opened with no red flags or any problems at all. They proceeded to accept the bet with no problems, waited for the outcome of the game; then when the player wins, NOW​ they have a problem? GTFO of here with that BS whoever agrees with this whether it be the shills in here or whoever. Pay the guy his money.

[SABAlove]

I was in the middle of writing my (long) response to you when you asked your
BOLD QUESTION?
which is why I didn't give you this answer: I'll ask him. Maybe he'll tell me. I'll get back to you, since we're "friends" and all. Wait! maybe we're the same person too... shady!

Just FYI, the ~$4800 number came about because that was the limit 5Dimes would take. I think it was exactly 20BTC at the time.

Oh, and you seem to be hung up on this "use of BTC" the same way you are about the "shady wagering markets in NFL sides". As far as I can tell, books offer BTC transactions because they are easy, fast, and relatively anonymous. These are the good reasons to use them, not some sinister plot. I guess everyone using BTC in sportsbooks are all the same person too? It's a global conspiracy to "defraud" Tony by wagering NFL sides at his book - you nailed it!

I'll get back to you, but I doubt it will help.

Hey "friend",

You must have missed my question:

Your friend had his account limited yet he recommended the book to you to try out...and you were so interested you initially deposited $4800. I would LOVE to know how much your friend withdrew in Bitcoins before you deposited.

[bocajuniorska]

lol thats new... we cant use public locations to log on our betting accounts... That's hilarious now huh, this just proves what type of bookie this is. I've seen numerous times B365 limiting players cause there's a obviously a connection between a previous limited account by them BUT they ALWAYS pay the winnings up to that point, they don't freeroll the guy lololol.

[Limited]

5D should pay! 5D is accusing a guy that he has scammed them so they should prove that scam. Just suspecting someone because of same IP/device/market is not enough. Thousands of people are betting on same team,sport market..., hundreds of people can use same IP (vpns, wifi, public places, towers....) and same device can be used shared with your friends, family etc... It is not a crime to use a same device, I guess.

Like other said. The bookie should detect potential ID abuser in the process of account verification. Once they have approved account, accepted and confirmed the bet and waited the score to be official, they have no right to confiscate winnings or accuse the client. Those facts that the client have been accused should be known already during the opening of the account. So the bookie is acting very unethically by refusing to pay AFTER the event and AFTER opening and verifying the account. Not to mention that it is an A+ rated bookie.

[swordsandtequila]

Same markets does not refer to the same team/bet. It means if Guy A. wagered on tennis totals, and Guy B. wagered on tennis totals on a totally different game, that's the same market. It refers to the type of wager in general. 5Dimes is saying that Guy A. was limited on a certain market and Guy B. wagered on that same exact market.

I'm not saying 5Dimes shouldn't pay this one particular wager...but you best believe this is not a "friend" situation IMHO. "Oh here sign up to 5Dimes on my iPad, oh here use Bitcoins (for $4000+ initial deposit...), oh here make the same type of wager, etc.". Smells like crap to me.

P.S How much did his "friend" withdraw via Bitcoins from 5Dimes? I might just die laughing if it's roughly $4500...around the same amount of this guys initial deposit.

I know what same market means, but thanks anyway. The fact it was an NFL bet is laughable, if it was Filipino ping pong they might have a point. And BTC is not that unusual, if it wasn't gaining popularity they wouldn't offer it. I use it, should I be investigated? Pay the man then close his account if they deem it appropriate, but they booked the bet so they should pay. Bettors can't/shouldn't free roll, neither should books. Especially A+ rated books .

[shari91]

I'm just curious what books y'all are referring to that verify accounts before a new user places their first bets? It's typically done at the time of the first withdrawal request unless something arises that warrants investigating before. And we don't even know WHEN 5D pegged his account as there was another two week gap between first bet and second. (After two week gap between depositing the max and the first bet). Considering the vast majority of sign ups at books deposit the minimum to get a bonus, lose their bonus on a -3000 favourite and piss off, can you imagine if books spent resources verifying each of those rubbish accounts before they ever bet?! So unless someone is going to rattle off these books that somehow never pop up in any of the complaints we deal with behind the scenes, let's just drop that fantasy land stuff.

Also Tony has two rules in his T&Cs that we agree to when we sign up: 1. Use of multiple accounts to circumvent limits is prohibited. 2. Use of multiple account numbers or names in order to receive bonus promotions, referral awards, or exceed limits is forbidden and may result in the forfeiture of ALL funds received/won as a result of these actions.

Really a book can say anyone with brown eyes isn't allowed and that'd be their prerogative since no one's forcing us to join. Same goes whether it's a book at the top of the page, a D rated book or an F one. Either way though, some of you are going way off base with what the issue is. Best of luck SABA but as someone who was a beard and who has also used them, I think you might be in a bit of trouble here.

[daringly]

Player put in a $4500 bet on an NFL side. There's no claim that this was a bad line. At that point, Tony could have reviewed the account and voided the wager if he thought there were something fraudulent. He didn't.

If he waited until after the event to void the winnings, the player was free-rolled. The only time the "industry standard" would allow that is if there were clear evidence of fraud. If, as the player states, the only evidence is that the player opened an account in LV on his friend's iPad, that's not enough (assuming we can verify he lives in LA, and placed the bet in LA).

Is this dispute really over an NFL Sides bet, and not some sort of NFL derivative? Limiting a player on the biggest US market is Mickey Mouse bookmaking. Voiding a winning wager on the biggest US Market after the event, under these circumstances, is scandalous without more.

[Limited]

All bookies should verify ID before approving accounts. There are laws that are requesting this from bookies. IE only 18y + are allowed to play. All Australian bookies will ask you for all documentation before you can even login and bet, many European bookies also. IE bet365 has fully verified my account, and called me on my phone, before they opened my account.

The 2 rules mentioned above are perfectly OK, betting same market, using same ip or device is not proving nothing. Same IP, same device was also used in sing up process, there is the place for bookies to act, not after the accepted and settled bets by accepted accounts.

[daringly]

I'm just curious what books y'all are referring to that verify accounts before a new user places their first bets?

Any book that uses Iovation for fraud detection. I know of several books have their own in-house software to detect any IP overlap, like what happened here.

[T4TRUTH]

industry standard is "you book the bet, you pay the bet"

doesn't matter how shady the guy is/was, he made a bet that was accepted and it won, not even sure what's being argued about

eggggggssssss ACT LEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
SIMPLY AS industry standard... if they dont have employees in place to catch this ahead of time... PAY the guy, fire employees get new ones or PAY.. pay the right staff the right wages and this does not happen, be chep run skeleton crew for watching over things.. well pay 4500 every time.. dimes bad decision on staffing nothing more nothing less.

[T4TRUTH]

I'm just curious what books y'all are referring to that verify accounts before a new user places their first bets? It's typically done at the time of the first withdrawal request unless something arises that warrants investigating before. And we don't even know WHEN 5D pegged his account as there was another two week gap between first bet and second. (After two week gap between depositing the max and the first bet). Considering the vast majority of sign ups at books deposit the minimum to get a bonus, lose their bonus on a -3000 favourite and piss off, can you imagine if books spent resources verifying each of those rubbish accounts before they ever bet?! So unless someone is going to rattle off these books that somehow never pop up in any of the complaints we deal with behind the scenes, let's just drop that fantasy land stuff.

Also Tony has two rules in his T&Cs that we agree to when we sign up: 1. Use of multiple accounts to circumvent limits is prohibited. 2. Use of multiple account numbers or names in order to receive bonus promotions, referral awards, or exceed limits is forbidden and may result in the forfeiture of ALL funds received/won as a result of these actions.

Really a book can say anyone with brown eyes isn't allowed and that'd be their prerogative since no one's forcing us to join. Same goes whether it's a book at the top of the page, a D rated book or an F one. Either way though, some of you are going way off base with what the issue is. Best of luck SABA but as someone who was a beard and who has also used them, I think you might be in a bit of trouble here.

the two rules you mentioned are hide behind.. how is someone going a round about way to their rules, the guy set the account up they gave him the limits, that rule refers to creating multiple account with 500 limit say so set up multiple account to get 5k on the game.. hind behind, does not stand in this case.
accepted the bet, PAY THE GUY.....

[shari91]

All bookies should verify ID before approving accounts. There are laws that are requesting this from bookies. IE only 18y + are allowed to play. All Australian bookies will ask you for all documentation before you can even login and bet, many European bookies also. IE bet365 has fully verified my account, and called me on my phone, before they opened my account.

The 2 rules mentioned above are perfectly OK, betting same market, using same ip or device is not proving nothing. Same IP, same device was also used in sing up process, there is the place for bookies to act, not after the accepted and settled bets by accepted accounts.

I live in Australia. The rule is actually 90 days after the creation of the account does the person have to provide ID or risk closure of their account. You sure as heck don't have to provide ID before betting!! Why do you think bookies spend so much during AFL and NRL games offering bonuses?! It's to get people to impulsively open their account and bet during ad breaks!

And no, there are definitely no laws requiring CR bookies to verify ID. Seriously you're comparing apples to oranges here. You cannot use what you're used to with 365 or Aussie rules to think that's how it flies offshore.

[SABAlove]

You have restored my faith in humanity. Thank you.

Seems like cloverfield and kraken work for 5dimes. But, in all honesty; the account should have came into question by 5dimes when this friend opened the account on the same device, not after a bet was placed, accepted and especially won. What was 5dimes waiting for?? For the actual BET to lose before they took action?

Now, I have no problem with 5dimes as I play there and have been paid $3k in the last 2 weeks with no problem. But, if they keep this guys winnings; then that will set a very bad precedent. I have a couple of friends that live within a 5 mile radius of me that have a 5dimes account; does this mean if I placed a bet from my account from my friends phone because my phone battery died, that 5dimes has the RIGHT to now Freeroll the bet? 5dimes accepted the bet and waited until the results of the game to finally take action?

I say 5dimes should pay the guy his money, then they can limit him or horse collar him or anal probe him and close his account if they want to. But, the FACT of the matter is that 5dimes allowed the account to be opened with no red flags or any problems at all. They proceeded to accept the bet with no problems, waited for the outcome of the game; then when the player wins, NOW​ they have a problem? GTFO of here with that BS whoever agrees with this whether it be the shills in here or whoever. Pay the guy his money.

[cloverfield]

I'll get back to you, but I doubt it will help.

Thanks for the response. Hopefully since you came to SBR and publicly in the forum about this issue, whoever is handling your dispute will respond as well.

I am really curious if it's in the same range as your initial deposit.

We all have opinions on the situation. I just personally don't believe it at all. I hope there is an amicable outcome for all involved.

Seems like cloverfield and kraken work for 5dimes.

Yeah whenever you post something that involves common sense and logic that go against a player it always comes up.

"Oh hey someone is posting the book has a right to be concerned about this account/situation, they must work for the book!!!"

[shari91]

Any book that uses Iovation for fraud detection. I know of several books have their own in-house software to detect any IP overlap, like what happened here.

Of course some books do but to imply that they would've known of the overlap before accepting the bet is a big call. It's yours to make though so have at it.

the two rules you mentioned are hide behind.. how is someone going a round about way to their rules, the guy set the account up they gave him the limits, that rule refers to creating multiple account with 500 limit say so set up multiple account to get 5k on the game.. hind behind, does not stand in this case.
accepted the bet, PAY THE GUY.....

Hey I'm not saying the rules are great! The majority of the complaints we deal with never hit the forum so I've seen rules lately that are all over the shop from books that I wouldn't even play at with $1k of free money because they're that dodgy! I just go by what the great Willie Bee always emphasised here... you join a book you accept their stated terms and conditions. You don't like those terms and conditions, go to another book. It's a philosophy that's not only served me well but saved me a few times when I've spent the time to actually read what I'm agreeing to! (ie when I was bearding I wouldn't have played at 5D!!)

[Limited]

I live in Australia. The rule is actually 90 days after the creation of the account does the person have to provide ID or risk closure of their account

Well, I was requested to do a complicated verification process BEFORE I could use (fund) my account with a known AU bookie.

I am not comparing bet365 with 5D or any other bookies. It was just an example how some bookies do their business.

You are saying that there are no requirements by regulators or laws for bookies to verify ID before allow someone to place bets and gamble. What about protection of minors or anti money laundry laws?

[shari91]

Well, I was requested to do a complicated verification process BEFORE I could use (fund) my account with a known AU bookie.

I am not comparing bet365 with 5D or any other bookies. It was just an example how some bookies do their business.

You are saying that there are no requirements by regulators or laws for bookies to verify ID before allow someone to place bets and gamble. What about protection of minors or anti money laundry laws?

In that specific case with you, that book for whatever reason chose to do that. The standard at all of the regular books is open account, accept bonuses (not in VIC), and you need to verify within 90 days or they'll freeze your account. You can still verify after but it'll become useless until you do.

With offshore, as in Costa Rica, etc, no there aren't those regulations because there is no proper regulator. Some of the jurisdictions have regulators who are there to issue licenses that aren't worth a thing but they definitely don't deal with complaints, fraud, anti money laundering or anything else other than collecting fees. It's the wild west out there.

[Optional]

There is no time limit on when a book needs to detect a rules breach.

It doesn't matter if they do verify accounts before any betting takes place. They can still find something later.

If they detect the issue after a bet is made or even 3 weeks later they still have the same right to enforce their rules.


The point with the OP was did he breach the rules. It seems pretty obvious he did, whether with malicious intent or not. And he seems to be one of the few posters in this thread that appears to get that.

He also appears open about everything. I hope Tony cuts him some slack if he has doubts but cutting back the bet to the other players $1000 limit genuinely seems like a fair response to me based on what we know.

[Limited]

In that specific case with you, that book for whatever reason chose to do that.......
With offshore, as in Costa Rica, .......... It's the wild west out there.

That specific case is quite common practice for international clients opening accounts with Aussie bookies. Agree about your second point, in Costa Rica bookies with or without licence or regulation it is pretty much wild west. This case is a perfect example of it.

[SABAlove]

Shari-
1. I didn't violate either of those T&Cs you quoted.

2. Your timeline is also inaccurate. I only placed 1 bet, ever. It was ~2 weeks after opening the account.

3. It is trivially easy for a computer to lookup a deviceID and IP address in a table of known deviceIDs and IP addresses at time of account creation.

4. Certainly a book can choose to deny service to anyone they please, but should a book be allowed to FREEROLL anyone they please?

If I were a "beard", you would be right. The part you are missing is that I am not. Like I've said before, the issue for me is that Tony was rude, belligerent, and offered no possible path to resolution. I'm hugely impressed that SBR even bothers to get involved, but ultimately I doubt Tony will listen to reason.

This treatment should be a warning, to others, however, that if you can imagine a situation where you might accidentally raise a "red flag", 5D management can and will use that as an opportunity to freeroll you without any recourse (except for SBR, kudos again!).

I'm just curious what books y'all are referring to that verify accounts before a new user places their first bets? It's typically done at the time of the first withdrawal request unless something arises that warrants investigating before. And we don't even know WHEN 5D pegged his account as there was another two week gap between first bet and second. (After two week gap between depositing the max and the first bet). Considering the vast majority of sign ups at books deposit the minimum to get a bonus, lose their bonus on a -3000 favourite and piss off, can you imagine if books spent resources verifying each of those rubbish accounts before they ever bet?! So unless someone is going to rattle off these books that somehow never pop up in any of the complaints we deal with behind the scenes, let's just drop that fantasy land stuff.

Also Tony has two rules in his T&Cs that we agree to when we sign up: 1. Use of multiple accounts to circumvent limits is prohibited. 2. Use of multiple account numbers or names in order to receive bonus promotions, referral awards, or exceed limits is forbidden and may result in the forfeiture of ALL funds received/won as a result of these actions.

Really a book can say anyone with brown eyes isn't allowed and that'd be their prerogative since no one's forcing us to join. Same goes whether it's a book at the top of the page, a D rated book or an F one. Either way though, some of you are going way off base with what the issue is. Best of luck SABA but as someone who was a beard and who has also used them, I think you might be in a bit of trouble here.