[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The pols will want regulation which will not prevent these types of incidents.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think it could do more than you are thinking. For those following the story, a detailed history of AP user 363 and other "superusers" is critical in determining exactly what fraud took place. For example, we do not know if 363 followed POTRIPPER to his other tables in the 1K tourney. This would be incredibly damning evidence. We do not know if superuser accounts were observing cash game tables where players were apparently cheated. Regulation could provide requirements for the archival of this type of data and more. This data could then be used for restitution, prosecution, etc. Moreover, the knowledge of such an independent archival of this type of data would likely have prevented such a fraud from occurring in the first place.
[/ QUOTE ]
AP agrees to 3 party audit
D$D
[/ QUOTE ]
The "3rd party" is already an auditor of AP. One poster said it is like having your own lawyer investigate you. In addition, AP has had time, if so inclined, to purge some incriminating evidence. In a regulatory scheme where mucho data is automatically and independently acquired and archived, safeguards are much more effective. I would even argue for a common "poker engine" that all sites share. This engine would track everything necessary to ensure game integrity.