ZeeJustin the next to get caught multi accounting Party MTTs

[excession]

it's because sitting in a darkened room as a teenager clicking away 24/7 isn't noted for its capacity to engender moral or ethical growth

they have no ethical sense at all and so we are left with self-deluded whining that it's Party that is in the wrong for taking their funds

[William]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He's definately got some explaining to do, or he will lead a very lonely life.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have a feeling the people he hangs out with already do the same thing or don't have a problem with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're absolutely correct. He's probably worried about the money, but else he doesn't give a S***.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
http://grindblog.blogspot.com/2006/02/215-update.html

"Competition is good and the hardest part is it is the same people over and over and over so I'm having to switch back and forth between accounts and mix up my game a lot."

[/ QUOTE ]

This sounds like playing 1 account at a time. Changing screenname/logins to prevent opponents from easily recognizing you seems like a fair practice. Party does allow you to change your handle every 6 months. Thanks for posting the link and quote.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if this is all there is to it, it still violates TOS and fair play. Anything that doesnt pass muster in live play (and multiple identities certainly wouldnt) sux online.

[mother_brain]

Maybe somebody can help me with this. But I was able to change my PP screen name about 8 months ago, by simply going to the PP website and clicking on a link. If this is still something they offer it would completely negate ZJ's reasoning for what he did, as though 1000 other issues don't.

[NLfool]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, it’s true. I did use these accounts to enter multiple accounts in the same multi table tournaments. I have never done this in a tournament with less than 1,000 players.

I have been at the same table as myself. For what it’s worth, my standard protocol has been to increase my number of tables when this happens. As most of you know, I will very rarely be playing fewer than six tables at a time. If I had 6 tables open and two of my accounts were brought to the same table, I would simply open up 4-6 more SNGs. I felt that this would negate my unethical advantage. With 10 tables open, I just play tight and solid. I can’t even remember the hole cards one account folded after the flop, and I’m certainly unable to pay special attention to that table. After talking to Curtains, I realize my standard play should have been to sit one account out when this happens, but I want to make it clear that I never used collusion to my advantage, never chip dumped, or did anything of the sort.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL what are you trying to sell dude. You tried to gain every unfair advantage and when the most opportune moment came along you tried to negate your advantage? I'm a moron but for you to try and sell this line is insulting

[Jbrochu]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess people don't realize that the rules that online poker rooms institute aren't just random obstacles for players, but in fact ways of making sure that supergeniuses like ZeeJustin don't get an unfair advantage over the average joe who knows only how to play one account.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope you're not implying that if the "average Joe" were smarter, he would have figured out how to play multiple accounts. After all, it's possible some average Joe's - like me for instance - just choose not to cheat.

[excession]

Making a second account for RB is cheating and if Party confiscated all funds from those guys who did it then I wouldn't lose a second's sleep..

//picks up another rock...

[Kazuya]

hey

hate to hijack, but i also remember spoony135 in the 100 rebuy on stars one day actually bragging in chat (in the final 27) that both his accounts are still in.. someone might want to investigate that also...

off with their heads!! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[KaneKungFu123]

DVaut,

Ever heard that famous saying "All evil needs is for good men to remain idle"?

[runout_mick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is it fair to ask curtains (and others) how long/how much they knew about Zee and others multi-accounting?

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not?

You've got two buddies. Buddy A has been taking a few bucks out of your pocket every now and then without you knowing. Buddy B knows, however -- but doesn't tell you about it.

You catch Buddy A with his hand in your pocket -- and you feel (justifiably) wronged. Buddy B admits he knew what Buddy A was doing, and admits what Buddy A was doing was wrong -- shouldn't he have to explain why he didn't tell you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Next, let's dig up McCarthy and round up all them commies!

You're not a pinko, are you? Hmmmmmm

[/ QUOTE ]

I think my example was appropriate.

I don't want a witch-hunt -- but I think it's unethical to remain silent if you know cheating is occuring. It most certainly cost some people money who would have liked to have known that the best players were utilizing this strategy.

I'm sure anyone who knew (IF anyone knew) what ZJ was doing felt they were in a complicated situation. Merely because it was complicated doesn't mean we can't flesh out right from wrong, and learn from our mistakes.

[/ QUOTE ]

My point wasn't to single out your comments specifically, and I apologize. All I was trying to say is that this is an EXTREMELY sensitive issue right now, and people had better be VERY careful about what they say and who they say it about.

There seems to be plenty of room for innocent people to become severely tarnished by flippant remarks, and to offhandedly speculate about who may have known this or that is, in my opinion, very irresponsible.