ZeeJustin the next to get caught multi accounting Party MTTs

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
shaniac / curtains

You are not seriously trying to equate a victimless crime with cheating people out of money are you? The two of you come of almost as bad as ZJ in this thread.

J

[/ QUOTE ]


You are the one who says its a victimless crime. Thats your opinion, its not a fact. FWIW I think drug laws are too harsh as they are, I just came up with a random example.

The point is that the law is not in place for you to decide whats important and what isn't. And if you do decide that you can pick and choose which illegal things are important enough so that you must rat someone out for them and which aren't, anyone else should have that right also. You are not an interpreter of the law nor is anyone else on this forum.

[Lori]

[ QUOTE ]
You are not an interpreter of the law nor is anyone else on this forum.


[/ QUOTE ]

Fossilman is.

Lori

[Q_and_A]

Even the most remote possibility that multiple entries could be seated at the same table during the course of a tournament makes arguing in their favor completely illogical.

Turn the tables. Invite multiple entries. Make a rule that if multiple entries end up seated at the same table, at any point in the tournament, the largest stack is immediately eliminated; if more than one multiple entries are simultaneuosly seated at the same table, all but the smallest stack are immediately elimininated. I doubt that any multiple entry player would play under such rules by simply discounting the affect of the rule based upon the "remote" chance of being seated at the same table.

[jaydub]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
shaniac / curtains

You are not seriously trying to equate a victimless crime with cheating people out of money are you? The two of you come of almost as bad as ZJ in this thread.

J

[/ QUOTE ]


You are the one who says its a victimless crime. Thats your opinion, its not a fact. FWIW I think drug laws are too harsh as they are, I just came up with a random example.


[/ QUOTE ]

No it is a fact, it is up there with prositution as classic example of a victimless crime.

[ QUOTE ]

The point is that the law is not in place for you to decide whats important and what isn't. And if you do decide that you can pick and choose which illegal things are important enough so that you must rat someone out for them and which aren't, anyone else should have that right also. You are not an interpreter of the law nor is anyone else on this forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, this is as bad as ZJ's now infamous MHSNL post. You see there are these things called ethics and morals, I think El D has a book on them he's been trying to pimp.

J

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]

The point is that the law is not in place for you to decide whats important and what isn't. And if you do decide that you can pick and choose which illegal things are important enough so that you must rat someone out for them and which aren't, anyone else should have that right also.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with this statement is that if everyone followed it we'd still be under british rule. There are laws that I choose not to follow. One of them is illegal transportation of alcohol. Having a 20 year, 364 day, and 19 hour old brother be a sober driver while you happen to have beer in the trunk of your car is illegal in the state of Indiana. I know I've stood infront of a judge because of this. Will that prevent me from doing it again? nope. Does that mean I think Justin Zee should cheat? nope.