Cheating in Online Poker

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Charlie.
my position is that having multiple accounts should be disallowed completely. While I have no problems in a vacuum particularly with somebody opening an aocount for rakeback purposes. However, gioven that doing that is indistinguishable from opening accounts for more nefarious purposes I really feel that sites should be stricter about restricting access to one account and that people with multiple accounts who are interested in cleaning up the game should close their other acocuntsd voluntarily.

[/ QUOTE ]

From my point of view, this is how I would recommended sites handle it.

[MLG]

adanthar,
before the flames hit, please respond to some of my points.

[Exitonly]

I dont get how after JJ [censored] PRODIGY posted in this thread, saying that EVERYONE HAS MULTIACCOUTNED.... and that it's NOT A BIG DEAL, We got completely derailed into talking abuot CLATYON, a non multiaccouter.... I'm fine that he got reported, but THERES NOTHING INTERESTING HERE........... LETS MOVE ON.
JJPRODIGY POSTED IN THIS THREAD!

~stephenNUTS

[CharlieDontSurf]

[ QUOTE ]
Charlie.
my position is that having multiple accounts should be disallowed completely. While I have no problems in a vacuum particularly with somebody opening an aocount for rakeback purposes. However, gioven that doing that is indistinguishable from opening accounts for more nefarious purposes I really feel that sites should be stricter about restricting access to one account and that people with multiple accounts who are interested in cleaning up the game should close their other acocuntsd voluntarily.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok I get that. I personally don't think in reality it would make much of a dent in the # of MTT multiaccounters/"cheaters" given u can just stake your friends etc and then take over for them at any given time or coach them thru AIM. But if the sites would police it heavily it might help somewhat..though I'm not sure they can even do this nor do they care enough to try.

But as a general rule/code then yeah I would agree it makes sense...even if it means a large % of 2+2 would end up without rakeback as a result.

[adanthar]

yo,

I think it's a gray area (duh) that is completely unpoliceable by sites without a 1 account per household rule (ugh) and, on top of that, there are definite legitimate reasons for multiple accounts - rakeback being just one of a large number. on top of that, FTP and Stars *can* and *have* allowed certain people to have 2nd, 3rd, etc. accounts as their whim strikes them - just ask David Benyamine, or anybody with a legitimate, approved 100% rakeback account they paid Full Tilt tons of money for.

it's a bad spot, I agree, but it's simply not something that sites should be banning for 'every' reason.

(fun fact: at least on cake, if you make a rakeback account but something goes wrong and it's not credited to the right affiliate, support's solution is often to simply have you make another account.)

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
But as a general rule/code then yeah I would agree it makes sense...even if it means a large % of 2+2 would end up without rakeback as a result.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have purposefully not gotten any rakeback deals for the simple fact that I agree with focault's reasoning; to me, it's probably stealing and borderline unethical and against the TOCs. Adanthar is far smarter than I am, and finds that to be crazy, so maybe I'm wrong. As it stands, though, I'm in the focault court of "there's really no legitimate reason to have a second account for rakeback", and I wouldn't object to sites cracking down on the practice.

I realize I'm in the distinct minority on that, though.

[MLG]

adanthar,
im not saying banning, at least not on first offense. also, if the site allows it in specific situation thats fine with me. im just not ok with sites and players letting it to go more or less unchecked and accepting it as part of the landscape like they do currently.

[DrewDevil]

adanthar,

While it may be possible for there to be legitimate reasons for "multiple account having," don't you think that the fact that some "multiple account havers" become "multi-accounters" and CHEAT AT ONLINE POKER (which you yourself said is a massive problem) is reason enough not to allow it?

I mean, making it easier to get rakeback seems like a pretty flimsy reason to allow something with such great potential for abuse.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
adanthar,
im not saying banning, at least not on first offense. also, if the site allows it in specific situation thats fine with me. im just not ok with sites and players letting it to go more or less unchecked and accepting it as part of the landscape like they do currently.

[/ QUOTE ]

I honestly think if a site outright allows it for some people (ie Benyamine, because he's a superstitious pro) and lets other people buy that privilege (100% RB) it is complete hypocritical [censored] to argue that the rank and file should be locked out of RB accounts because they dared to sign up under the wrong affiliate two years ago. (speaking of educating the fish, how is that one for unfair gaming conditions?) therefore, I'm never going to be in that camp.

[uclabruinz]

Adanthar,

I didn't throw clayton under the bus, he walked in front of it himself.

However, while the topic for which Clayton threw himself in front the bus is very relevant (i.e., having several accounts), I agree with those who want to discuss more the JJProdigy and other known multiaccounter issues. Then again, though, you, Adanthar, don't want to participate in that discussion despite your knowledge, eh?