Stars catches a bot and it's........my mom

[ubercuber]

It seems that Jeff's sophisticated bot detection is based on outdated "hunch" technology.

[The4Aces]

you are going to get Jeff fired. Wtg

[ColdCaller]

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, I had already been worrying that by "outing" this whole chain of events, I would have made it hard for anybody from Stars to actually admit that a mistake had been made. I did not want to make a huge production out of this -- I would have rather kept everything on the D/L, but became very frustrated with their unwillingness to even CONSIDER that a mistake had been made.

[/ QUOTE ]

Teddy, I understand that you'd LIKE to keep it on the down-low, but sometimes airing it out is the only way to get the attention of people like "Jeff," who are stubborn and self-righteous to the point of absurdity.

You did well by getting this into the public sector and showing why PokerStars has much ground to cover. The voices of many outweight the voice of the few, and you've obviously been open and honest enough to let people come to the conclusions they will arrive at.

Let's see what the response is at this point, now.

[MicroBob]

Good news Teddy.

I think you also have to consider that without this thread Stars might have just stopped dealing with your complaints on the matter.

There's no real way to know for sure whether the thread has caused some obstacle with a possible resolution or for Jeff to somehow fake-up some evidence or something....OR if it's the spark for this further investigation that may very well not have happened at all otherwise.


I've been saying for a long time that you have to be careful with these accounts.

When some problem comes up there is frequently some poster saying, "Wow. That's really bad. You should sue them." (and they aren't joking). Some people think that's a realistic option.

On a lot of sites there just isn't that much recourse and/or it might not be as safe as you would like.
This not only includes the sites implementing some policy against you but also with the chance that your account gets hacked OR some disgruntled C/S rep hacks into it himself. Whatever.

I'm reasonably confident that my money is safe and I'm not really concerned about it.
I just understand that there is SOME risk involved so I move my money around accordingly.

[betadecay]

TTIWWP's!

[betadecay]

[ QUOTE ]
he seems to be a very smart, competent and verbose young man, but one who as my mother put it "is not willing to question his own logic" on this one....

....I would stake my entire bankroll on her NOT using any kind of bot. moms are simply *not* capable of something -- it is not even within the realm of possibility: mine happens to be beyond reproach. she has no CLUE how to use a bot and simply would not even look into it --



[/ QUOTE ]


I'm just messing with you. I believe it is more likely Jeff screwed up on this one, but I don't think you should rule out your Mom setting up a bot.

It now seems that Jeff has evidence of your mom playing several sessions of considerable length. This means stars would have had to make the mistake several times no? Although I wouldn't put it past Jeff to make exagerrations with info that would seem trivial to him( "1 time, 30 times either way its a bot right?"). The fact that several sessions were mentioned just makes this wierder. Either Jeff is lying(this should get him fired), or a bot was running from your moms comp.

[Mike Haven]

[ QUOTE ]
you are going to get Jeff fired. Wtg

[/ QUOTE ]

It looks like Jeff is certainly going to find out that he's not quite as indispensable as he seems to like telling everyone he is.

Assuming Mom is found Not Guilty, I hope that Stars reviews all of Jeff's cases where the victims were unlucky enough not to be inhabitants of the Zoo. It is starting to look reasonably likely that Jeff is yet another one who can't understand the content of the all-important "logs", and is misinterpretting the information found therein.

[Chris.]

Lucky for your mom she has a son that is well-versed and fairly well-connected in the on-line poker world.

I hope Jeff is embarrassed by his insinuations about how your mother chooses to spend her leisure time.

[teddyFBI]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you are going to get Jeff fired. Wtg

[/ QUOTE ]

It looks like Jeff is certainly going to find out that he's not quite as indispensable as he seems to like telling everyone he is.

Assuming Mom is found Not Guilty, I hope that Stars reviews all of Jeff's cases where the victims were unlucky enough not to be inhabitants of the Zoo.

[/ QUOTE ]

For the record, even if Stars uncovers the mistake, I do not wish any ill upon Jeff. All of the emails he has written (even if they come off as more than a little self-assured) have been at least polite (most of the time), verbose, and quick. I wish Party could fine someone, ANYONE, who interacted with customers so conscientiously. I am also confident that, this incident notwithstanding, he is probably very good at his job. One of Lee's emails to my mother says that Jeff is one of their top security guys and that he trusts his judgement 6 ways to Sunday. Given the high esteem in which I have always held Lee, I am sure he would not bestow that praise on Jeff unless there were at least SOMETHING to it.
But is a hallmark of a good service representative not also the humility to admit that nobody is infallible, and a willingness to turn a critical eye even to one's own work?
And it's that sense of humility that I simply did not see anywhere in his extended communications.

[Mike Haven]

[ QUOTE ]
One of Lee's emails to my mother says that Jeff is one of their top security guys and that he trusts his judgement 6 ways to Sunday.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't you find that a little worrying?

Here's one of Jeff's e-mails that you posted earlier, as a reminder of their apparent main bot-finding procedures:

"Hello,
Your request is already at the level of a Supervisor. When it comes to 'Bot issues at PokerStars, I am the one Supervisor to whom all such cases are brought. That's why I was handling your case to begin with.
Most of the 'bot hunting methods we use here were invented by me, and very few others (aside from our software developers) understand them in detail.

I really don't say this to dissuade you or to boast -- it is simply true.

Any review by my own managers will follow a pattern of many in the past. "What does Jeff think?" and "If Jeff believes its a bot, then that's good enough for me."

I really hate to say this point blank, but your claim that you're not terribly technically savvy does not hold much water, given what we see in your account history. As I said, I'm not going to go into detail as to what we look at to make such a determination, but the things you're doing are rather out of the ordinary, and highly indicative of non-human play.

I'm afraid this decision is final. I would be happy to escalate it to someone like Lee Jones for review, but please believe me when I tell you these two things: It's just going to fall back on me, with such people trusting my judgement... and that the evidence I'd present to them is very damning."

Very scary, more like.