PP closed my account

[GH.]

[ QUOTE ]
they can.

but they really don't care if you are a winning player or not.

they might care enough regarding your rake-back.


Most likely the worst that would happen is they would close your accont and give you your money back.

Unless you were up to something super-shady they won't confiscate your funds. In the past, receiving rake-back has never qualified as being super-shady.


But what is all this 'can they' stuff?
Of course they can.
they have your money. If they wanted to not give it back to you that's up to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have not done anything super shady. Thanks for the reassurance that my money is safe.

[teddyFBI]

PP recently did same to me. After 24 hours or so, i got an email saying they had re-opened my acct, without ever a peep as to why they had closed it in the first place.

[GrannyMae]

My friend and I also play the same games, although we definitely don't collude.


your problem is NOT because of RB. it is because of the above. if you never cheated with your friend, you will get every dime back. if you did, kiss your funds goodbye.

that simple

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
My friend and I also play the same games, although we definitely don't collude.


your problem is NOT because of RB. it is because of the above. if you never cheated with your friend, you will get every dime back. if you did, kiss your funds goodbye.

that simple

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why Party is #1 and will continue to be. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ohnonotthat]

So they FINALLY caught up with you . . . it's true what they say.

"The wheels of justice grind slow but they grind exceedingly fine".

*

I know of NOBODY whose funds have been seized, but this could have to do with the fact that I associate with decent, honorable people.

Did you ever hear of a concept called the "appearance of impropriety" ?

How many 15-30 games are typically going at PARTY, 10, 20, 30, more - yet you needed to play with your"friend".

Be reasonably assured you will get your money back unless they can establish a major pattern in yours and his play - even then you'll likely get back what you put in, as to the winnings . . . a definite maybe.

Please note that I am a usually a staunch ally, sight unseen, with anyone against PARTY, on those rare occasions when I am not I have remained neutral, yet here I sit having torn you a new one.

Maybe I'm just cranky today - yeah, that's probably it.

I can't imagine it has anything to do with them having found the smoking gun in your possesion.

I cannot imagine they would be under the jurisdiction of any court vis-a-vis this matter and if they are it could take years to have this heard - if it ever was - and then you'd have to win . . . good luck.

*

In closing: If the masses here find your story holds water I will be the first to contribute to a fund used to assist you with this matter - whether I think you are on the up and up or not.

*

Best wishes,

- Chris

[ohnonotthat]

They are number one DUE to happenstance and DESPITE their best efforts at self mutilation.

I agree with Granny's statement but please let's not build a shrine to honor behavior that is in their, and only their, own interest.

PARTY could screw up a wet dream; wait.

EDIT: Change COULD to HAS and add "on many occasions".

[ohnonotthat]

When did they first say it ?

An hour ago, last week, mid summer . . .

One thing I have never seen them do is string anyone along; feel confident that they if there is bad news to break, they will in fact break it.

[ohnonotthat]

Gibralt"A"r

and I'm not even certain this would be the country of jurisdiction.

They trade in the U.K., have servers in Canada - but on sovereign foreign (Native American) land - and may have assets in any of a dozen countries.

The world court is not well known for granting expedited trial dates.

"Justice delayed" may indeed be "justice denied" but they don't seem to be all that moved by this platitude.

[ohnonotthat]

Hmm -

You might be better off if you were [bots] assuming you operated independently of one another.

Unless they ruled on this while I was out (which they may well have) a which operates TOTALLY independent on other bots is a clever invention - if they operate dependently they are a larcenous device.

Sounds as though they draw little if any distinction between neurons and printed circuitry here.

Nor should they, IMHO.

[thatpfunk]

"However, we do play similarly. As in more LAG than 2p2 TAG. They will quickly figure out we're not bots because we both isolate fish ridiculously and we throw in random raises and threebets based on the situation. "

Does this sound as super-sketchy to everyone else as it did to me? I read it and thought "Oh, so you were colluding, now you're making excuses about it."