ZeeJustin the next to get caught multi accounting Party MTTs

[byronkincaid]

yeah, I don't think it gives internet poker a good image at all.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd just like to clarify again that the thing I posted was not referring to ZJ. I would hate to further muddy his name.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? Seriously, who cares about further muddying his name at this point?

[Yeti]

Sarcasm, my friend.

[Tuco]

[ QUOTE ]
Now, this is the correct response. Once again Pokerstars and Lee Jones show how it should be done.

[/ QUOTE ]

The correct response is to knowingly ignore cheating that was rampant on your site untill it becomes a large issue?

Stars (and to be fair all other sites) knew this was happening for a long time. They chose to ignore it. Then, when Party actually does something about it they follow suit. The race to be the number one cardroom compromised the ethics of the large rooms just as the race for internet stardom did to ZJ.

Tuco.

[psuasskicker]

yea pokerstars really did a great job here. really ground breaking [censored] they do.

I'm just skimming at this point and maybe I missed where this was addressed. It sounded like PStars missed the boat and didn't get ZJ before he got a lot of money out of that account. How is it that Stars didn't freeze his account the instant this cheating was outted? Not confiscate anything, but just freeze it so that he couldn't use or withdraw the money?

Or did they, and I just missed it?

If not, it seems like they REALLY missed the boat there, and that's frankly pathetic.

- C -

[golfinguy5]

I just recieved an email from Lee Jones and here was his respone:

Hi Brian -
Thank you for contacting us.

First, as regards your play on PokerStars against ZeeJustin, we have
reviewed his play in S&Gs, and it was absolutely clean. I see that you're
relatively new to PokerStars, so I'll tell you how we do business: if we
catch somebody cheating, we confiscate their money and we return it to the
people who they victimized.

Had ZeeJustin won any money illicitly in those $500 S&Gs, we would have
taken it and refunded it to you (or whomever was injured by the cheating).
It turned out that his cheating was confined to multi-table tournaments.

As regards what we are doing about the multi-accounting problem: we now
have better tools to check, and are in the process of writing additional
ones. We have investigations underway that are not Party-induced, and
we'll continue to be proactive locating and punishing cheaters. In these
two cases, we followed Party's lead because the initial reports of cheating
went to Party.

Brian, we have a full-time staff of people who do nothing but catch
colluders (who may be one person operating two mice). We routinely
send credits to people who were unknowing victims of collusion.
We just don't post every one on 2+2.

Of course, an incident like this makes us look at our own procedures to see
how they can be improved. We are circulating internally a list of possible
additions to our armor against this form of cheating. You may not see
anything immediately - then again, you might.

But I promise you that it's already gotten a lot harder to multi-account
successfully on PokerStars, and is going to become moreso.

Finally, as regards integrity on our site, it is *everything* to us. It is
my #1 responsibility, and everybody in this company is passionate to the
point of crazy about it. It is our entire business and we think about that
more than anything else.

You have my word personally and our word as a corporation that we will
never stop working to ensure that you are playing in a fair and clean poker
game or tournament at PokerStars.

Best regards,
Lee Jones

PokerStars Poker Room Manager

[TheNoodleMan]

I just ran a search on Lee Jones recent posts:
Lee Jones Posts
The 3rd one down is This Gem.
[ QUOTE ]
Hi folks -
Obviously, you folks weren't the only ones surprised by the turnout for yesterday's $215 NLH event. I was away from my computer and called the Costa Rican office to ask how many we got. The guy told me "5506" and I said "thank you", hung up, and turned to the person I was with and said "There must have been some kind of misunderstanding - he just told me 5506."

So here's the thing - I'd like to do some market research. I will give 1000 FPPs to each of two people here:

1. The best serious explanation for the 32% increase from last week. [1]

2. The best creative explanation. Points awarded for interesting ideas, unusual explanations, etc.

Regards, Lee

[1] Sorry, "giant east coast blizzard" is off the table - we've already thought of that. But you can mention it en passant.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well Lee, I think I might have a guess. Do I need to spell it out, or can I just have the 1000fpps?

[junglewarfare]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd just like to clarify again that the thing I posted was not referring to ZJ. I would hate to further muddy his name.

[/ QUOTE ]

I respect this position a lot. Sounds like ZJ could definitely learn a thing about ethics from you.

[Yanks02]

NoodleMan, please keep reading that thread. A few posts down:

[ QUOTE ]
Mr. Jones - You may not be aware of this, but February 12 was Grandma's day. If your Grandma is anything like mine, she likes a little excitement in her life from time to time. Perhaps 32% of the entrants decided to spend a little quality time with Grandma playing side by side in the tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

[flight2q]

[ QUOTE ]

Not sure if any of the shaniac apologists noticed
THIS BLOG ENTRY but it appears shaniac was able to buy into this tournament thirteen (13) times. That's a lot more than six (6) when you think about it. I guess this stuff goes on in live poker too, but since there is no watchdog community as with online, people like shaniac get a walk and are allowed to buy into a tournament over and over. Disgraceful.

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't seen any reply to this, so... just in case that was a serious post, I'll explain to you that there is this type of tournament called a "rebuy". I appreciate that you might not like them. If that is the case, then you should complain to the Commerce casino directly, because it is there intention for people to be able to buy in again.