Resolution of the Stars investigation.

[ColdCaller]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ah, no. I said "If he's telling the whole story," not "Tell us everything he knew."

[/ QUOTE ]

Ha. I can't believe you actually had the balls to hit "submit" on this one.

This is a justification I would expect from a 4th grader. Kids say crap like this on the playground all of the time.

The fact remains that you initially implied that Teddy was intentionally misleading the zoo with his post.

You were wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like you to source where I said that he was intentionally misleading us. I said he misled us, but through a choice of words that may have been a bit off.

None of my comments were wrong. If you want to go ahead and infer things about what I said, sure, I suppose it's easy to interpret them however you wish.

[EvilSmurf]

[ QUOTE ]
Any rigorous bot-detection process will result in some false positives.

[/ QUOTE ]

The occasional false positive is bad, but the alternative is far worse. Nice post Lee.

[detruncate]

I'm glad this turned out well, but the processes reinforces my belief that both sides would be better off if players had a clear avenue of recourse when disputes such as these arise. A sober second look from a less invested individual (such as an Ombudsman) would help prevent disputes from escalating to the level where customers feel compelled to bring public pressure to bear.

It would also go a long way toward allaying some of the lingering concerns that come with trusting sites like Stars with a significant amount of our money.

From Stars' perspective, employees should welcome the opportunity to refer prolonged disputes to a trusted individual whose job is to double-check that nothing has been overlooked. Responsible people dislike making avoidable mistakes far more than having to admit error. This is just one more way of helping them feel secure about the quality of their decisions.

It would also allow Stars to aggressively investigate cheaters at the risk of some false positives without too much concern about provoking widespread unease -- it's generally a lack of transparency and/or the worry of summary judgement without recourse that scares people.

[VK_Rick]

I've been following this, but have not yet posted a response. Now that things seem to be resolved, I just wanted to chime in and say that regardless of how Stars handled (or, more specifically, mishandled) this investigation, the apologies -- both the private emails and Lee's public post on this forum -- show both class and competence.

No, I don't think it's a good thing this happened. No, I don't think Teddy's mom should have been treated this way. On the other hand, I'd rather have them "catch" a few fake bots in their effort to stop the real ones than let a bunch of real bots slip through in an effort not to offend legitimate players.

I can only assume from the way this ended that Stars will remain vigilant and that their security will still trigger false positives -- but that they will study those results with considerably more care before making an accusaion. This, in my mind, is a great result to what started as a fairly ugly story.

[WhatDoesCallMean]

[ QUOTE ]
What else do you want from him? Are we going to give him [censored] because he apologized?

Yes, he was a jerk, and yes, he was wrong, but why pile it on?

[/ QUOTE ]

it is not his apology that he deserves [censored] for and you can surely see that.
he deserves [censored] cos he acted in a completely unwarranted manner towards a customer, because he was a jerk and because he was well wrong....not just a little bit wrong but completely off the wall wrong

and because he was a jerk


nice post Lee and its at least good to see that you are indeed taking responsibility for not reviewing his work and for relinquishing your authority on this one....a somewhat embarrassing admission to make but very believable from the tone of your email to Mom in stark contrast to jeffs

also good to see that super-jeff isnt gonna be 100% responsible for banning players in future and that a review process will instead be carried out which i assume will not involve asking jeff if he is sure he is right.

[augie_]

TeddyFBI,

Dude. Lee Jones just hit on your mom!

[LinusKS]

Lee Jones,

Thanks for taking the time to post here on 2+2. My estimation of PokerStars just went up.

A couple weeks ago 20+ Party bots were outted in the sng forum. To this day, no one knows whether Party shut them down, or whether the owner simply closed up shop.

One of the reasons I play at Stars, rather than Party, is that I trust Stars more, and your participation here is part of that.

Thanks again.


PS - if you run into Scott, tell him I'm just kidding about the "doom switch."

[William]

I would still like to know how you can start one thread writing "my mom is a 57 y.o. lady" and a second one "my mom is 55" ?

Seems very strange to me....

[krazyace5]

[ QUOTE ]
I would still like to know how you can start one thread writing "my mom is a 57 y.o. lady" and a second one "my mom is 55" ?

Seems very strange to me....

[/ QUOTE ]

Whats the big deal, I don't know exactly how old my mother is either.

[4thstreetpete]

I think the least pokerstars should do is at least give
Teddy's mom a $100 bonus ala party stlye. Pretty weak sauce
if you ask me for all the inconvenience the poor woman went through.