|
|
#71
03-02-2006, 11:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party loses another one to Stars
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry to disagree, but this kind of absolute power would lead to much abuse and threaten to undermine the trust people would have that their money is safe in poker sites. [/ QUOTE ] As far as I can tell, the sites have ALWAYS had this absolute power. 
|
|
#72
03-02-2006, 11:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party loses another one to Stars
I said:
[ QUOTE ] For example you created a new account with false name to get RB from your new affiliate. [/ QUOTE ] Creating second account is a clear breach of Party's T & C, no matter for which purpose.
|
|
#73
03-02-2006, 11:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party loses another one to Stars
Hmm, I think the majority of people close and reopen accounts. Either way I've read of party catching people doing this before and I don't think they siezed their account funds.
|
|
#75
03-02-2006, 11:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party loses another one to Stars
How many times you heard about Party seizing funds from multi-accounters before JJProdigy?
If you have more than one account on Party you better withdraw anything above minimum finds you need to play.
|
|
#76
03-02-2006, 11:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party loses another one to Stars
[ QUOTE ]
How many times you heard about Party seizing funds from multi-accounters before JJProdigy? If you have more than one account on Party you better withdraw anything above minimum finds you need to play. [/ QUOTE ] I remember reading about colluders who's accounts were seized. However JJ was the first I heard about multi-accounters.
|
|
#77
03-02-2006, 11:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party loses another one to Stars
[ QUOTE ]
Do you think they should? [/ QUOTE ] I assume this a question to catch me in a contradiction because of my stance on Stars' cheating policy. If the second account had been proven to be created for the intent of cheating, then yes I think the funds should be seized. However I don't think this would be something party could prove so the answer is hypothetical. I have stated my stance on cheating in other threads. I think violating T&C's and cheating are two seperate things. Cheating seems like it would always involve a violation, but violations will not always involve cheating.
|
|
#78
03-02-2006, 11:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party loses another one to Stars
Where do you draw the line between violating the T&C and actually cheating? You have been advocating a policy of having a single punishment for all instances of cheating, regardless of the circumstances or severity. But now you are talking about a person's "intent" behind their actions, and also claiming that certain infractions are not worth the same punishment as other infractions.
You created a poll on "Stars policy vs Party policy" when in fact both sites have the same policy: they make decisions on a case-by-case basis. I have a hard time understanding why anyone would have a problem with this.
|
|
#79
03-02-2006, 11:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party loses another one to Stars
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Second, I am pretty sure Party treats CC fronts differently and doesn't have the same problems Prima did, the sites have developed their security since then. [/ QUOTE ] We are talking about Party here? You know PARTY POKER? That site that so secure that they can only catch someone playing 6 accounts in one tourney when a player points it out. That's so smart that they let everyone downgrade their cruise ship room and cash out the 400 bucks. That has such quality people running their support that it's mucked like every [censored] day on this board. This is the site you think should have the right to be judge, jury and executioner? [/ QUOTE ] I was referring specifically to their financial security, specifically concerning "hot checks" being written to play on party. Your post is doesn't address any of the specific points I made. Looks like I win.
|
|
#80
03-02-2006, 11:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party loses another one to Stars
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Second, I am pretty sure Party treats CC fronts differently and doesn't have the same problems Prima did, the sites have developed their security since then. [/ QUOTE ] We are talking about Party here? You know PARTY POKER? That site that so secure that they can only catch someone playing 6 accounts in one tourney when a player points it out. That's so smart that they let everyone downgrade their cruise ship room and cash out the 400 bucks. That has such quality people running their support that it's mucked like every [censored] day on this board. This is the site you think should have the right to be judge, jury and executioner? [/ QUOTE ] I was referring specifically to their financial security, specifically concerning "hot checks" being written to play on party. Your post is doesn't address any of the specific points I made. Looks like I win. [/ QUOTE ] Whatever you need to believe to bolster your self-esteem.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
