***PSA, STOP POSTING CHECK AND BANK DETAILS HERE***

[Losing all]

How will we know when a problem is widespread? whoa

[RoundGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you see the disconnect?

[/ QUOTE ]
Let's try this one more time for the intellectually challenged.

I bank at a small midwest bank that still allows me to use my debit card to deposit.

Should I post the name and address of that bank on this forum? A yes or no will suffice, SweetPea.

[Dennisa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
NO GOOD COMES OF IT.

Just stop doing it. If you guys want to keep playing, stop making things easier for those trying trying to stop you from playing. I will 100% guarantee that the anti-poker forces get a significant amount of information from these boards that aid them in their fight against online poker.

So, why give them a road map by providing bank names (gee, my Debit/Credit card from meowchow credit union worked!) or check details (I got a check with a purple horsehoe on it, any idea what site it's from)?

Think people, no good comes of it. Just stop.

<cue BluffThis! chiming in>

[/ QUOTE ]

Good, lets just keep putting our heads in the sand. If a site can not get money to its players, even in todays environment, they should be exposed.

With a ban that you propose, all threads on Neteller would not be allowed, that is not right. Flame away, I am not the most elloquent speaker on this forum, but I dont want to see 2+2 just a shill site to promote online poker without exposit what could be pitfalls of the industry right now.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're misunderstanding me. I didn't say people shouldn't be able to discuss neteller issues, length of time in receiving checks, etc. etc.

I meant that people should stop posting specific details. Such as bank names, check details (this check has a shiny purple horseshoe and was printed by "balla checks" out of EmpireMaker2, WI), etc.

Does that help clarify my position?

I am in no way advocating a blanket ban on discussing deposit and withdrawl options, heavens no!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes I do agree with you on this point.

What I don't want banned is I requested a check from pokersite Y and its been 3 weeks and its not here. This is for all of our protection, and I would not even mind it being kept to one massive topic ala the Neteller info and WSEX topics.

[SweetPea]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you see the disconnect?

[/ QUOTE ]
Let's try this one more time for the intellectually challenged.

I bank at a small midwest bank that still allows me to use my debit card to deposit.

Should I post the name and address of that bank on this forum? A yes or no will suffice, SweetPea.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now you've changed the terms of the argument.
Should you? No. I personally do not.

"Should you" has never been the question. The question is "Should it be BANNED?" When you are talking about prohibition, I expect those preaching for a ban to show me much more proof than "It might kinda help us, maybe, we aren't sure. Well, it probably won't hurt us at least."

[DING-DONG YO]

FWIW, I never brought up TEH BANNED argument. Just that I think it's [censored] stupid and people should stop doing it (posting details that is)

[RainDog]

[ QUOTE ]
I understand that there is a belief that we somehow have details unavailable to the DOJ that will aid them in their investigation.

Please name those details and explain to me why you think the DOJ does NOT already have:

1. Multiple accounts at every site.
2. Multiple bank accounts from different banks to fund each site.
3. Regularly scheduled withdraw/deposits from every site, using every withdraw/deposit option that site provides.

The DOJ are not idiots. If they've decided to go after the sites, then they have every piece of data on money processing at that site. If they are NOT attacking the sites, then a "OMG Stars is using Chexx" thread that you think is a hot lead, means nothing to them.

You are painting a scenario of a DOJ that is so cunningly and doggedly attacking payment processors that they will pay out of their budget to scan hobbyist discussion forums, and yet...they are somehow so stupid that they won't simply follow the deposit/withdraw chain themselves to get hard evidence of their own.

Do you see the disconnect?

[/ QUOTE ] QFT


[ QUOTE ]

This is really pretty simple. There is no upside to giving out details on checks, i.e. I got my X site check today, it was from a company called Z that's located in Y.

There is a potential downside in that those actively trying to ban on line gambling can gain information. I'll admit that this is a low probability, but it is possible.

Why take the risk? I think that is all OP is saying.

[/ QUOTE ]

The upside, in an age where our greatest risk is that recreational losing players won't jump through the hoops to do their impulse deposits, is that these recreational players will know (through open communication) which companies and which checks are working. They also will observe the plurality of companies that are still on our side and that others are using them. Less fear of the unknown when one knows many others are participating successfully in the unknown.

This upside my friend, is far more +EV than the minimal risk of the downside.

It's also really sad that so many of you would act as such cowards in regard to your own rights. Don't act like criminals! Nothing needs to be hidden!

[RoundGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
Now you've changed the terms of the argument.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, you didn't understand what the argument was to begin with. My example was exactly what DDY was arguing against -- posting my bank details on this forum.

And RainDog, the downside is that I'd have every other 2+2 donk within a 500-mile radius of my bank setting up an account and getting a debit card. Good for them, initially, but how long do you think it would last?

I will keep my deposit option to myself, thank you very much.

[metsandfinsfan]

i posted pretty much the same thing in the credit card thread. Posting the names of the banks who's debit cards work is very very dumb. Plz stop

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
You are all are extremely underestimating the DOJ.

This is not like hiding your joint from the local police force outside the bar while you pretend you aren't doing it and they pretend they don't see.

There's nothing to be revealed here that they don't already know. Calm down.

[/ QUOTE ]
We don't know what the enemies of online poker do or don't know. That's the truth and anything else is speculation. Anyone who studies history knows that the world is chaos. Big government and big business are not scientifically managed enterprises that carefully research and analyze every issue before making perfect decisions.

Sensible people don't help their enemies for no reason at all. Recently I read a post that someone had received a check from <foo> poker. That was a fine post because <foo> has been having a few problems of late and it was good to know that maybe things are turning around.

The post went on to name the bank that the check was written against. The poster who did that was either a saboteur or a fool. No possible good could come from naming that bank. Probably nothing bad will happen either, but you can't be sure of that. It's a freeroll for the bad guys.

I don't advocate censorship of this forum, but freedom of speech includes freedom to STFU. Don't be a fish in the game of life. Think a moment before you share stuff that no one needs to know anyway.

[SweetPea]

I stand corrected. OP did not bring up banning of details.

For the record,
I do not post my own details for the reason stated by RoundGuy above.
I DO want you all to post your details for the reason stated by RainDog, however.

My arguments were based on the mistaken idea that OP was asking for a 2+2 enforced ban.