![]() |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
I also feel they are very wrong about ethical standards in general with their "whatever is unenforceable is acceptable" line of reasoning. [/ QUOTE ] Well, what can anyone do about it? Imo there simply isn't a reasonable counter-argument to the fact that any policy implemented to stop "1 player to a hand" or "Player A buys 6 people into event and takes over in the endgame" is going to result in inaccuracy and minor-leage witchhunts. There simply isn't a feasible option to disallow this that doesn't infringe on personal rights as a computer owner. From PokerStars' standpoint as an online poker room, if they are to make a policy it should be in their first interest to make sure that they are able to implement the policy 100%. If they cannot implement the policy, then they do no good setting the policy out. If anything, setting a policy that cant be implemented looks bad for PokerStars, as it insinuates from a client perspective that PokerStars is not always in control of things and can be manipulated. This can't be good from a shareholder sense in the current state of online poker. The solution doesn't start by complaining to the poker room, imo it starts with establishing and embracing a community like pocketfives and 2+2 on a greater scale that gets involved in such a way that devious actions are cut down. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|