A Dragon Money player was suddenly banned after depositing $92,000 and requesting a $102,000 withdrawal, triggering immediate public scrutiny. The casino explained the decision by alleging “crypto laundering.”

Rather than proceeding with a transparent and routine compliance investigation supported by clear evidence, the matter rapidly became public. Conflicting narratives spread online, accusations were traded, and the situation escalated into a wider information battle, with claims of coordinated attacks replacing any straightforward effort to resolve the account dispute.

What happened?

— According to Dragon Money, the account was linked to a competitor and used for “laundering.”

— Affiliates claim that the player — a real person named Anna — did not violate any rules and was ready to undergo verification.

— Until that moment, the casino had no complaints about the player — large losses were accepted without issues. But as soon as Anna tried to withdraw her winnings, the ban occurred.

Industry reaction:

— Major affiliates, including MoneyBeatsEvil, suspended cooperation with Dragon Money

— Social media is divided: some demand the return of the deposit, while others see this as a competitor’s provocation.

— The creator of the RolfPay payment system, linked to the casino, stated that no “Anna” exists and that this is an attempt by one of the owners of a competing project to “get” someone else’s crypto.

Why it matters:

This case shows that even if a player does not violate any rules, they can be banned based on unproven suspicions. And even if the deposit is indeed linked to “wrong” crypto, the question remains whether the operator is obliged to return the initial deposit.

Dragon Money has remained silent so far, but the reputational costs are obvious. In a highly competitive niche, such a case could cost far more than $102K.