Sites should take these steps immediately...

[Kevin J]

[ QUOTE ]
No more than one account from the same IP can enter a MTT...(obvious)

[/ QUOTE ]

It boggles my mind this isn't already in place.

[ QUOTE ]
Clearly declare datamining against the rules and take steps to prevent it, including the sharing or pooling of hand histories among players....

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm Ok with this.

[ QUOTE ]
Declare the use of heads up displays as an unfair advantage and ban the use of them...

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't like this idea and not just because I use one. Banning HUDs would decrease multi-tabling activity, which would be the equivelant to the sites shooting themselves in the foot. Yes, I agree it's a tool used mainly by pros. But any advantage this gives them over a poor player who is playing for entertainment is offset by the fact that the pro is multi-tabling and the poor player is not.


[ QUOTE ]
Either make rakeback completely above board or eliminate it...

[/ QUOTE ]

I could live with this as well. Too many players (and affiliates) are doing subvertive things and jumping through hoops in order to receive rakeback. However, I heavily lean towards making it above board. Again, I think that if the biggest site were to eliminate this altogether, it would be akin to shooting itself in the foot. It eliminates a big reason why a lot of people choose to log onto this site as opposed to a different one. You can make the case that another site successfully doesn't offer it, but I don't think there's much question is would cost them players.

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
And wait a minute, o doyle... aren't you the guy that made the "army" (union) to give high volume players "incentive" (special treatement) from poker sites?

So now you want to eliminate small-time rakeback so that anyone who isn't a high roller can't participate?

Holy Hoffa move. Talk about unfair trade practices.

edit: the tone of this post is petty and rude. I apologize, ODoyle. I'd delete it but I think that's a d-bag move worse than leaving an insulting post [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]


holy misinterpretations.

odoyle has been pretty consistent the whole time.

he wants any incentives the sites give to be ABOVE the table.
he has always thought that this would be good for ALL players and for the sites.


he is saying so again in this thread.
there has been no back-tracking by odoyle at all.

He is still in favor of the power of the high-volume players getting together for better incentives and has never strayed from that.


learn to read please.

[bobbyi]

This is a good list, but you forgot outlawing check-raising. It's really unfair to new players who don't understand this tactic that they are constantly getting check-raised by twoplustwoers and other scam artists. I hope sites will take action soon.

[Shoe]

But I make most of my money by inducing check raises from 2+2'ers

[CrayZee]

On a check raising similar note, slowplaying should also be disallowed as it is very deceptive. Oh yeah, no bluffing, too. In the T&C of a site, it should say players must play a weak-tight or weak-loose style. That's plenty of freedom!

It's obvious that sites shouldn't bother to compete for players with rakeback, advertisments, or any other incentives.

In fact, I'm going to start a "poker political party" that has a socialist stance! Equal opportunity for all, I say!!

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, I'm going to start a "poker political party" that has a socialist stance! Equal opportunity for all, I say!!

[/ QUOTE ]
The OP has previously tried to organize a labor union for poker players, so I'm sure you will have his support.

[Newt_Buggs]

None of these can be enforced. Banning them will just limit how often it occurs to varying degrees. Just look at rakeback, party is strongly against rakeback and look how well they've been able to stop it. You just aren't going to be able to enforce these types of things over the internet.

[smoore]

[ QUOTE ]
learn to read please.

[/ QUOTE ]

I read fine. I disagree with an either/or situation. It does not need to be above board, it does not need to be eliminated.

Once this union has been created it's shady to not back ALL of the players that want rakeback. IMO, the stance should be modified to, "All rakeback should be above board." Eliminating rakeback while a union operates would be underhanded and very Teamster circa 1957. I would still disagree with this stance but I could co-exist with it.

[mroels]

Can someone please explain this to me?

What I really don't understand is how these guys can cashout money to Neteller? (I personally use Firepay coz its cheaper but I assume that Neteller operates on the same principles) I mean doesn't you name and email address have to match on your pokersite account and Neteller account have to match? And Neteller requires ur real name, ssn, and bank info to be verified. So how could the websites not recognize multiple accounts with the same email address cashing out to the same Neteller account?

[T-God]

How about some reasons why the online poker world would be better off without HUDs and rakeback? Seriously, why???