Nation\'s Modship
 

Admins,

Nation's ethics in relation to Poker have recently been brought up in a recent thread in the Internet Gambling forum. ( This one.)

Through his posts in the referenced thread, Nation has made quite clear his position on the issue of "One player to a hand" as it relates to online poker.

Nation apparently feels as if having multiple players to a hand online is perfectly ethical because it is not specifically stated as a violation of FTP (or other poker site) Terms of Service. I propose that having multiple players to a hand whether live or online is still violating the basic ethics of poker itself. Therefore, Nation should not be in a position to represent two plus two in any way-- in short, his position as moderator must come to an end.

Here are the pertinent quotes by nation:

[ QUOTE ]
Tiedup,

lee jones has specifically made posts in the past that say team play is allowed as per their t&c because it's unenforceable. i don't see how that makes me have bad morals.

should i stop coaching also as that's against the integrity of the game apparently? you could never coach live, but it's fine online and there are tons of people on 2p2 involved in coaching some way or the other.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
no. i'm following the site's t&c.

why do some sites allow PAhud and some don't? cardroom specific, yet you guys take advantage of the software when you can.

you can say that they take advantage of people by having each toher's opinion on hands; you ahve the advantage of knowledge about software like pahud.

[/ QUOTE ]



There are more posts from that thread to support this truth, but this should prove sufficient to establish "who believes what." This is also not the first time nation's ethics when it comes to poker have been questioned.

What nation feels is ethical/unethical in a non-poker sense is quite frankly none of my business. I am not claiming to have stellar ethics outside of poker myself. It is a well known fact around here that I was expelled from my University for cheating. I make no claims of being better than nation or anything like that.

That being said, nation's clearly unethical stance on poker should not and cannot serve as representative of two plus two in any capacity.

Please remove his modship.

Regards,
TIEdup14


I welcome and invite everyone with an opinion on this issue to please share your feelings in this thread. I would ask that we keep things civil, and above all remain respectful of whatever the admin decides to do (or not do) in this matter.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

Nation is fine

lol at people upset that a group can control themselves from tilting

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

I don't see any reason why Nation's modship should be taken away.

This is a ridiculous thread, but I'm sure it will have 100000 responses like the other one.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

I think there a couple issues at hand, first nation has taken an extremely dismissive attitude towards the whole issue. Given the information from the bot thread I think its completely fair for people to entertain the idea that bots are a possible explanation to the situation on some level. Why is nation so opposed to letting people discuss the idea that its possible?

Another thing is the issue of creating a team to consistently work together using a specific strategy and constant supervision and discussion during actual play. I wouldnt go as far as to say its unethical but I believe it goes against what 2p2 stands for as a community. I believe as a community we standard for thinking about poker not coming up with a simple strategy that will break even and nation has admitted he wanted to stake a member of the group. Is this really the kind of behavior we want the mod of a strategy forum condoning? Its surely not something I want and not the kind of behavior that someone who represents 2p2 should partake in. Nation is free to have his own opinions and ideas but if we dont condone them as community he should not represent us. The creation of teams of players to work over poker rooms is clearly bad for poker and one of our mods is condoning this practice, thats not someone I want representing me as a 2p2 mod.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

TIE,

wow man, i'm afraid you're just like, way off base and horribly wrong here.

citanul

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think there a couple issues at hand, first nation has taken an extremely dismissive attitude towards the whole issue. Given the information from the bot thread I think its completely fair for people to entertain the idea that bots are a possible explanation to the situation on some level. Why is nation so opposed to letting people discuss the idea that its possible?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nation had first hand knowledge of the group and wanted to rest fears that they were bots. He's talked with them. He's seen them play. It's bad whenever players hear of bots. It was nice of him to share his first-hand knowledge, which he didn't have to do. He is now being dragged through mud for it.


[ QUOTE ]

Another thing is the issue of creating a team to consistently work together using a specific strategy and constant supervision and discussion during actual play. I wouldnt go as far as to say its unethical but I believe it goes against what 2p2 stands for as a community. I believe as a community we standard for thinking about poker not coming up with a simple strategy that will break even and nation has admitted he wanted to stake a member of the group. Is this really the kind of behavior we want the mod of a strategy forum condoning? Its surely not something I want and not the kind of behavior that someone who represents 2p2 should partake in. Nation is free to have his own opinions and ideas but if we dont condone them as community he should not represent us. The creation of teams of players to work over poker rooms is clearly bad for poker and one of our mods is condoning this practice, thats not someone I want representing me as a 2p2 mod.

[/ QUOTE ]

simple strategy--you didn't read the guide to beating low buyin Party SNGs back in the day apparently

teams--goto the IRC channels, find out about skype, see the AIM convos going back and forth-- most all your 2p2 winners are involved in this kind of activity, not as blatant as all sitting in a room together all day, but loosely 'teams' fo sho.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think there a couple issues at hand, first nation has taken an extremely dismissive attitude towards the whole issue. Given the information from the bot thread I think its completely fair for people to entertain the idea that bots are a possible explanation to the situation on some level. Why is nation so opposed to letting people discuss the idea that its possible?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nation had first hand knowledge of the group and wanted to rest fears that they were bots. He's talked with them. He's seen them play. It's bad whenever players hear of bots. It was nice of him to share his first-hand knowledge, which he didn't have to do. He is now being dragged through mud for it.


[ QUOTE ]

Another thing is the issue of creating a team to consistently work together using a specific strategy and constant supervision and discussion during actual play. I wouldnt go as far as to say its unethical but I believe it goes against what 2p2 stands for as a community. I believe as a community we standard for thinking about poker not coming up with a simple strategy that will break even and nation has admitted he wanted to stake a member of the group. Is this really the kind of behavior we want the mod of a strategy forum condoning? Its surely not something I want and not the kind of behavior that someone who represents 2p2 should partake in. Nation is free to have his own opinions and ideas but if we dont condone them as community he should not represent us. The creation of teams of players to work over poker rooms is clearly bad for poker and one of our mods is condoning this practice, thats not someone I want representing me as a 2p2 mod.

[/ QUOTE ]

simple strategy--you didn't read the guide to beating low buyin Party SNGs back in the day apparently

teams--goto the IRC channels, find out about skype, see the AIM convos going back and forth-- most all your 2p2 winners are involved in this kind of activity, not as blatant as all sitting in a room together all day, but loosely 'teams' fo sho.

[/ QUOTE ]
You dont see a difference between what is going on based on the information in the bot thread and what most 2p2 partake (I do also).

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]

teams--goto the IRC channels, find out about skype, see the AIM convos going back and forth-- most all your 2p2 winners are involved in this kind of activity, not as blatant as all sitting in a room together all day, but loosely 'teams' fo sho.

[/ QUOTE ]

Myturn2raise,

We can extrapolate this issue as far out as we want. Nation, for example, chose to extrapolate out as far as to say that using pokertracker is also unethical.

I dont particulary feel that this or your analogy is appropriate here.

This is pretty cut and dry:

1) 4 players sitting in a room having more than one person to a hand is unethical in poker.
2) nation openly supports the above statement as "ethical" (or at the very least not unethical)
3) nation should not be a mod representing 2p2 if he feels this way.


We can get into the ethics of coaching, pokerhud, and pokertracker any other day.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see any reason why Nation's modship should be taken away.

This is a ridiculous thread

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]

TIE,

wow man, i'm afraid you're just like, way off base and horribly wrong here.

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]

Nation is fine

lol at people upset that a group can control themselves from tilting

[/ QUOTE ]


yup. completely agree.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

my understanding has been that 2p2 has always followed the ethics of the individual site T&Cs...looks like nation is doing the same.

If the continued approval of site T&Cs is the question at hand, I understand. However, Nation's modship shouldn't be questioned over this issue. He is in agreement with the rulemakers (the online sites) and the precedent of 2p2.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

I dont understand why this isnt clear to everyone else... please, point out what part of what I'm saying is incorrect:

1) In a live game, sweating is allowed. (watching, not saying anything during the hand/action/game)
2) In a live game, actively giving advice to another player on how to play a hand during the hand is NOT allowed.
3) Not only is [premise 2] not allowed, it is UNIVERSALLY accepted as "unethical poker."
4) I posit that this is a UNIVERSAL poker ethic, and the same rules should apply online as in live play.

Guys, I understand that online =/= live. But there are basic rules and ethics of poker that must be followed, regardless of whether or not it is possible to break them online.

Entering a MTT with multiple accounts is universally unethical, live or online. Why isnt "multiple players to a hand" treated the same way?

Because you can get away with it?

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
my understanding has been that 2p2 has always followed the ethics of the individual site T&Cs...looks like nation is doing the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a very low level of ambition for a poker community. I think the thread in question and others show that most 2+2'ers want the bar to be put higher. Thus they get annoyed by somebody like Nation being a mod. It is not really reason for a demodding-punishment, but it is enough that the admins should start looking for a mod that would be more accepted by the users.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

I think the most damning thing is Nation's attitude throughout the entire thread. Any rational person would at least entertain the possibility that bots are an explanation for the situation outlined in the bot thread, so far Nation has been extremely dismissive and has repeatedly stated that his intention in that thread is to make sure people dont even consider that this group of his friends are using bots. Mods are supposed to facilitate discussion relevant to the forum it is posted and in this case I feel as if Nation has been trying to censor those of us who think that botting is a possibility and therefore should not be a mod. I think this behavior indicates other things as well but has little relevance to why he should not be a mod because its hardly concrete.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think the most damning thing is Nation's attitude throughout the entire thread. Any rational person would at least entertain the possibility that bots are an explanation for the situation outlined in the bot thread, so far Nation has been extremely dismissive and has repeatedly stated that his intention in that thread is to make sure people dont even consider that this group of his friends are using bots. Mods are supposed to facilitate discussion relevant to the forum it is posted and in this case I feel as if Nation has been trying to censor those of us who think that botting is a possibility and therefore should not be a mod. I think this behavior indicates other things as well but has little relevance to why he should not be a mod because its hardly concrete.

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes absolutely no sense.

It's not like Nation looked at the information, then tried to steer the conversation away from bots.

HE KNOWS THESE PEOPLE. PERSONALLY. LIKE REAL LIFE LIKE. He knows they aren't bots. Why in the world should he not try to steer the conversation? He knows the base of the first 500 posts in that thread to be incorrect. That's..ya know..important information.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

The case in your OP isn't very strong. You can't demod someone for stating that a commonly accepted practice is ethical.

But I think it's very likely nation is either lying or overstating his knowledge to cover for a friend in a tough spot. Especially since he was caught saying:

[ QUOTE ]
Chuck is a good guy, and to be honest, doesn't even know how to configure his virus protection; I had to do it for him.

[/ QUOTE ]

When the guy has been discussing and fixing AHK auto click scripts on these very forums...

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

TIE,

how about you start a thread in some other forum, not called "Nation's Modship," instead called something like "The ethics of more than one player to a hand in online play"?

The only thing your complaint seems to have to do with nation is that he disagrees with you. Shucks.

Honestly I don't feel like writing up my personal feelings about any of a variety of poker rules or ethics at the moment, but without getting in to any of that, as far as I know, nation has done a good job as a mod, has done nothing wrong in this case, has a sensible ethical code of conduct, and hopefully will have a good laugh when he sees your thread when he's next around.

Also, if you really want someone to tell you what part of what you are saying is incorrect, it would be both numbers 3 and 4. Games have sets of rules. When a game explicitly doesn't have a rule saying you can't do something, that usually means that you can do it. Further, when a representative of a site takes the time to come to this forum and explain that something is totally within the bounds of "the rules" of that site, that pretty succinctly means that it is not against the rules of that site.

Multiple accounts entering the same mtt is "against the rules." Please just stop with this nonsense about ethics. It makes every argument shades of gray that need not be involved with these matters. Multiple players to a hand is not against the rules. Why? Who really cares. Amongst the many reasons, total unenforcability of the rule is good enough to pick. Whether or not you think something is "ethical" doesn't really matter when it's not against the rules.

Finally, I laugh at the idea that there's basically anyone who hasn't either watched someone else play online and made comments like "omg you have to raise" or had someone else do the same thing while watching them play. The whole thing, however, is pretty silly in general. Live players exchange/give reads to each other all the time. They might not be giving real time advice, but they sure as hell share informational advantages. Where's the line? In live casinos there are several very clearly drawn lines. In online play, in general, the lines are drawn exactly as clearly - you just don't like where. That's not a problem with nation, it's a problem with the rules.

To people claiming that nation doesn't deserve to represent 2p2 or the forum members: wow, sigh, lol. Take your pick.

citanul

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
Chuck is a good guy, and to be honest, doesn't even know how to configure his virus protection; I had to do it for him.

[/ QUOTE ]

nation implies that Chuck is too computer illiterate to program a bot by saying the above.

But he's bright enough to install, program and update hotkey scripts:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rue#Post8932154

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rue#Post8988150

Note that nation was involved in other hotkey programming questions ans script threads with Chuck. nation isn't directly lying to mislead people, but his truthiness is approaching zero here.

Are mods allowed to run smokescreens to cover for friends?

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
When a game explicitly doesn't have a rule saying you can't do something, that usually means that you can do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just such a completely [censored]-up mentality. Somebody could easily make your everyday life a living hell without breaking a single rule or law. In every aspect of life, including games, rules will never be sufficient to regulate behaviour.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

zb,

also, to my knowledge, nation isn't a mod of the forum where this discussion is taking place. he has no "power of censorship" there. people need to be more careful with the ridiculous claims they throw around. not that this messageboard has a "freedom of speech," but still. come on down off the high horse people. if nation is found out to be lying to cover up for someone who has a bot, that's one thing. until that time though, seriously, calm down.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

Citanul,

First off, thank you for sharing your opinion.

Basically, you are saying that multiple players to a hand is ok online, but not ok live-- is this correct?

Also, I'd like to hear more people (specifically non-mods) chime in.

Thanks again,
TIE

Edit: added a question

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When a game explicitly doesn't have a rule saying you can't do something, that usually means that you can do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just such a completely [censored]-up mentality. Somebody could easily make your everyday life a living hell without breaking a single rule or law. In every aspect of life, including games, rules will never be sufficient to regulate behaviour.

[/ QUOTE ]

arf,

i very much doubt that is the case. the legal code covers these things nicely by including broader definitions for things, and by considering things on a case by case basis. additionally, this is why the law (and rules of games) are mutable things, growing and evolving over time. however, real life is not the same as games.

consider angle shots. true angle shots don't break any rules. they are "scummy" and "unethical" but the player is left to defend themselves, not rely on the card room to protect them. no, when you play speed chess we don't need a rule that states you can't throw sand in your opponent's eyes, but we do have rules for things that actually have to do with game play. there just are things that are not regulated. lack of regulation means that there's no reason that people have to not engage in the activity. if you choose to look down upon an activity, that's fine, but if it's not against the rules, it's not against the rules. there aren't defacto rules just because it's what you, or even a majority of people, think there should be.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
Citanul,

First off, thank you for sharing your opinion.

Basically, you are saying that multiple players to a hand is ok online, but not ok live-- is this correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

TIE,

What I'm saying is that live, there is a rule that states that multiple players to a hand is forbidden, while online, at least some sites either do not have such a rule, or specifically do have rules stating that it is allowed.

citanul

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]

no, when you play speed chess we don't need a rule that states you can't throw sand in your opponent's eyes, but we do have rules for things that actually have to do with game play. there just are things that are not regulated. lack of regulation means that there's no reason that people have to not engage in the activity.

[/ QUOTE ]

But if you play speed chess and throw sand into your opponent's eyes, you are likely to be disqualified, not? Because most games have developed a code of conduct and this code of conduct is enforced by giving an arbitrator room for judgement. Chess, soccer, golf, many games are run that way. It should be clear for everyone that these people are breaking the established codes of conduct in poker. The sites needs to have some way to address that and ban such players. It is what I and many other players demand to keep this game fair.

I know that in the SNG-community on 2+2 there is a culture for bending the rules as far as possible, I think it is a culture which needs to be defeated, and I think that failing to do so is ultimately going to lead to this game losing credibility wrt being fair and thus the game will become much less popular among recreational players.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
there aren't defacto rules just because it's what you, or even a majority of people, think there should be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Leave the house once in a while, please. Then observe how the world continues to function from day to day. Remove the respect for the de facto rules and most of our business life would collapse within months.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
there aren't defacto rules just because it's what you, or even a majority of people, think there should be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Leave the house once in a while, please. Then observe how the world continues to function from day to day. Remove the respect for the de facto rules and most of our business life would collapse within months.

[/ QUOTE ]

All this does is further illustrate the point made earlier in this thread.

If you want to debate whether it should be legal to do what Nation is saying these guys are doing, go ahead.

But NONE of this has ANYTHING to do with Nation's ability to moderate his forum.

All of the moderators on this forum are different people with different opinions. I'm sure plenty of us do things that some people may not approve of(yes poker related things), but none of that has anything to do with our ability to moderate our forums.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I'd like to hear more people (specifically non-mods) chime in.

[/ QUOTE ]

this thread is pathetic

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

ZB,

I tangled enough with nation in that thread and am not going to express an opinion on whether he should or shouldn't be a mod. And your distinction between his ethical opinions and his modding conduct is correct, *provided that* he hasn't lied in that thread to back up his buddy. FWIW I think the more likely explanation is that nation has poor judgement of people, and that his friend has deceived him. Note however that Nate tha'Great, who is hardly a regular flame thrower, just said in post#10314159 the following:

" My bullsh*t detector registers a very high number when I read nation's posts".

I have read a lot of Nate's posts in the past and they are to be respected. For me though again, the "BS" is in nation's judgement most likely, and not his truthfulness.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Chuck is a good guy, and to be honest, doesn't even know how to configure his virus protection; I had to do it for him.

[/ QUOTE ]

nation implies that Chuck is too computer illiterate to program a bot by saying the above.

But he's bright enough to install, program and update hotkey scripts:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rue#Post8932154

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rue#Post8988150

Note that nation was involved in other hotkey programming questions ans script threads with Chuck. nation isn't directly lying to mislead people, but his truthiness is approaching zero here.

Are mods allowed to run smokescreens to cover for friends?

[/ QUOTE ]

Also from that thread, nation claimed to have no involvement with Chuck's scheme in the beginning. He later revealed that he attempted to stake people into this scheme but things fell through. Again, not a direct lie, but not truthy at all.

If mods are held to some standard, these two examples certainly violate most standards. nation was an unknown to the thread. He threw himself onto the grenade to try and cover for Chuck and typed himself in and out of corners in the process.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
ZB,

I tangled enough with nation in that thread and am not going to express an opinion on whether he should or shouldn't be a mod. And your distinction between his ethical opinions and his modding conduct is correct, *provided that* he hasn't lied in that thread to back up his buddy. FWIW I think the more likely explanation is that nation has poor judgement of people, and that his friend has deceived him. Note however that Nate tha'Great, who is hardly a regular flame thrower, just said in post#10314159 the following:

" My bullsh*t detector registers a very high number when I read nation's posts".

I have read a lot of Nate's posts in the past and they are to be respected. For me though again, the "BS" is in nation's judgement most likely, and not his truthfulness.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bluff, if that indeed is the case and he's being honest, but a bad judge of character, can you explain the two examples I've cited? First he's not involved, then he tried to buy into this. First Chuck is unfrozen caveman computer user, then nation is responding to Chuck's hotkey script threads on 2+2.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, you are saying that multiple players to a hand is ok online, but not ok live-- is this correct?

[/ QUOTE ]
tied,

FWIW, there's been a lot of previous discussion on 2p2 about the "one player to a hand" rule online. There is at least one group of poker pros, one of which is Jerrod Ankenman (I don't remember the other names), that talk on the phone and give advice to each other while splitting all of their action. Naturally, when this came out, there was a lot of controversy and idignation surrounding it in the same gist as your OP. However, they were completely upfront and honest about what they were doing, and Stars gave them the okay. The bottom line is that there is no "one player to a hand rule" online because it is impossible to find. It becomes very problematic, and is generally a bad idea, to have rules in place that can't be enforced.

So essentially, yes, multiple players to a hand online is fine, while live it obviously isn't. I understand that it's counter-intuitive, but you have to realize that online and live poker are two different things, and that there have to be separate rules to adjust accordingly. It's okay if you think it's unethical, but I don't see how that leads to nation being demodded. I hate to bring this up again because so many people use this analogy, but there are plenty who think PT and PAHUD is unethical, and they probably have a better case than the ones who think one is fine but not the other. Just ask Bluffthis.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
Also from that thread, nation claimed to have no involvement with Chuck's scheme in the beginning. He later revealed that he attempted to stake people into this scheme but things fell through. Again, not a direct lie, but not truthy at all.

[/ QUOTE ]
Nation said:

[ QUOTE ]
I made plans to stake them myself (not to play with chuck) and did not go through with it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe this is being nitty, but the two seem quite different to me. "Things fell through" seems to imply that he planned to go ahead with it, but perhaps the deal fell apart or some such thing...IE he would have done it if he could have. "Did not go through with it" sounds like Nation made a decision not to do it, even though he could have.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

KotOD,

I'm not totally ruling out nation not being fully truthful. However buying into a group that plays the same roll but where each play independantly straight up, is a reasonable alernative to an intent to buy into a botting consortium. Also note the post in the zoo thread with a very reasonable explanation that the group first started out straight up, then only later started botting, and now plays straight up part-time as a cover, which might be all nation sees.

And I questioned him on that script stuff too for not divulging that in his first post. However it nonetheless is possible that he made that ommission knowing it would look bad, but still honestly believing that was the extent of his friend's software use in playing.

Again the possibility of nation being untruthful in some way isn't zero by any means, but it's not a slam dunk he was lying. However it is clear that he has done himself a great disservice in these forums by his postings in that thread.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Chuck is a good guy, and to be honest, doesn't even know how to configure his virus protection; I had to do it for him.

[/ QUOTE ]

nation implies that Chuck is too computer illiterate to program a bot by saying the above.

But he's bright enough to install, program and update hotkey scripts:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rue#Post8932154

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rue#Post8988150

Note that nation was involved in other hotkey programming questions ans script threads with Chuck. nation isn't directly lying to mislead people, but his truthiness is approaching zero here.

Are mods allowed to run smokescreens to cover for friends?

[/ QUOTE ]

Also from that thread, nation claimed to have no involvement with Chuck's scheme in the beginning. He later revealed that he attempted to stake people into this scheme but things fell through. Again, not a direct lie, but not truthy at all.



[/ QUOTE ]

Watch what your saying, because you are misquoting him in order to help make your point.

I didn't read anywhere that he said his plans "fell through". I read that he decided not to do it. These are very very very different things.

Also. Just because he even entertained this thought, doesn't mean he was involved from the beginning.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also from that thread, nation claimed to have no involvement with Chuck's scheme in the beginning. He later revealed that he attempted to stake people into this scheme but things fell through. Again, not a direct lie, but not truthy at all.

[/ QUOTE ]
Nation said:

[ QUOTE ]
I made plans to stake them myself (not to play with chuck) and did not go through with it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe this is being nitty, but the two seem quite different to me. "Things fell through" seems to imply that he planned to go ahead with it, but perhaps the deal fell apart or some such thing...IE he would have done it if he could have. "Did not go through with it" sounds like Nation made a decision not to do it, even though he could have.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny, I'm thinking of this:

[ QUOTE ]
Yep, several of my friends wanted to get into Chuck's crew but had no startup money. I had plans to stake them and do this, but never got off the ground.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, again, another instance of the story shifting to cover something.


And yes, I said "fell through" where he uses "never got off the ground", my mistake. Either way, it's shady as [censored].

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Chuck is a good guy, and to be honest, doesn't even know how to configure his virus protection; I had to do it for him.

[/ QUOTE ]

nation implies that Chuck is too computer illiterate to program a bot by saying the above.

But he's bright enough to install, program and update hotkey scripts:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rue#Post8932154

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rue#Post8988150

Note that nation was involved in other hotkey programming questions ans script threads with Chuck. nation isn't directly lying to mislead people, but his truthiness is approaching zero here.

Are mods allowed to run smokescreens to cover for friends?

[/ QUOTE ]

Also from that thread, nation claimed to have no involvement with Chuck's scheme in the beginning. He later revealed that he attempted to stake people into this scheme but things fell through. Again, not a direct lie, but not truthy at all.



[/ QUOTE ]

Watch what your saying, because you are misquoting him in order to help make your point.

I didn't read anywhere that he said his plans "fell through". I read that he decided not to do it. These are very very very different things.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if I make plans and they "fall through", that's a large difference than "not getting off of the ground"? Enough for a finger-wag?

Either way, the plan was in place to go into Chuck's crew.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
I dont understand why this isnt clear to everyone else... please, point out what part of what I'm saying is incorrect:

[/ QUOTE ]
I'll try.

[ QUOTE ]
Guys, I understand that online =/= live.

[/ QUOTE ]
Do you?

[ QUOTE ]
Entering a MTT with multiple accounts is universally unethical, live or online. Why isnt "multiple players to a hand" treated the same way?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because online =/= live. Entering a MTT with multiple accounts is against the poker site's rules. Multiple players to a hand is not.

Am I allowed to sit in a poker room with a sheet of paper and mark down what every player does every hand? Can I use a calculator to calculate their VPIP, PFR, etc, from this information? Or perhaps a computer? Can I get some yellow stickies and mark down each players stats, then stick them to each player's foreheads? I'll need them to keep wearing those stickies too, so that next time I play that player, maybe in a week, maybe in a month, I will still have their stats. Will the poker room also provide me with another sticky for each player's forehead on which I can write extensive notes on their play? No? Then why can I do all of these things online?

Yes, some of these examples are a little over the top, but they demonstrate that, as you said, online =/= live. You are using rules and ethics almost interchangeably in some instances. Is 2+2 now to police ethics? Whose ethics should they use? Rules are clear, black and white...ethics are not.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
Funny, I'm thinking of this:

[ QUOTE ]
Yep, several of my friends wanted to get into Chuck's crew but had no startup money. I had plans to stake them and do this, but never got off the ground.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, again, another instance of the story shifting to cover something.

And yes, I said "fell through" where he uses "never got off the ground", my mistake. Either way, it's shady as [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]
Meh...I thought there was another post, but I couldn't find it. I'll concede that is much closer to what you said, makes my point much nittier.

I tend to agree with Bluff, though...I don't know that this is a big deal.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Funny, I'm thinking of this:

[ QUOTE ]
Yep, several of my friends wanted to get into Chuck's crew but had no startup money. I had plans to stake them and do this, but never got off the ground.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, again, another instance of the story shifting to cover something.

And yes, I said "fell through" where he uses "never got off the ground", my mistake. Either way, it's shady as [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]
Meh...I thought there was another post, but I couldn't find it. I'll concede that is much closer to what you said, makes my point much nittier.

I tend to agree with Bluff, though...I don't know that this is a big deal.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know that it is either, I'm just pointing out that the dude's story shifts constantly and some of it has been borderline lies/coverups.

Each piece of this starts out one way, and goes another when pressed.

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

On a side note, is 992 posts in one thread in 24 hours some kind of record? Hmmm...maybe not with POG around. Sniper? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Nation\'s Modship
 

Bobo,

YOU ARE FORGETTING THE EPIC BRANDI THREAD!