Re: Assumption of User #363 Being Alpha/Beta Testing Phase
 

I have User Account #84. It's possible that I was a beta tester, I simply don't remember--But at that point it was definitely very public--I don't believe for a second User #363 was an accidental beta testing backdoor--It was created on purpose after the fact.

Re: Assumption of User #363 Being Alpha/Beta Testing Phase
 

I assume this is about the Absolute controversy, in which case your post would probably be better off in one of those threads. It seems kind of lost here all on its own, and most people will have no idea what you're talking about without any context.

Re: Assumption of User #363 Being Alpha/Beta Testing Phase
 

[ QUOTE ]
I assume this is about the Absolute controversy, in which case your post would probably be better off in one of those threads. It seems kind of lost here all on its own, and most people will have no idea what you're talking about without any context.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed

post it in one of the HUGE threads but pm Nt adathar etc. and let them know what you know

Re: Assumption of User #363 Being Alpha/Beta Testing Phase
 

good point, wasn't sure which one to put it in and now i can't delete.

Re: Assumption of User #363 Being Alpha/Beta Testing Phase
 

I've tried keeping up with that stuff in BBV but it is so insanely big and I just don't have that many hours to wade through all the unfounded opinions and other random observations just to get to the actual meatier stuff.

It appears gotmilk might be onto something though.
I definitely thought it was kind of strange that everyone was making such a big thing about the user # being so 'early'.
It's in the 300's.
How many beta-testers would a site like that have and how long would they be doing it?
Not surprised in the least to learn of a 'regular' user whose number is way lower than 383.

Obviously that seems to very likely be the super-user account that could see the hole-cards. But why AP would wait until 382 other accounts had been made before adding on that super-user account struck me as odd.

Re: Assumption of User #363 Being Alpha/Beta Testing Phase
 

MicroBob, there is a new thread in BBV which a good summary.

This story is getting starting to get a lot of media exposure today on the web.

Re: Assumption of User #363 Being Alpha/Beta Testing Phase
 

yeah, I saw somebody linked the article from freakonomics or whatever that guy's blog is.
Pretty interesting.

Will be a big story in Bluff in the near future I suspect...and probably will probably have to be covered in Cardplayer too.

Re: Assumption of User #363 Being Alpha/Beta Testing Phase
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've tried keeping up with that stuff in BBV but it is so insanely big and I just don't have that many hours to wade through all the unfounded opinions and other random observations just to get to the actual meatier stuff.

It appears gotmilk might be onto something though.
I definitely thought it was kind of strange that everyone was making such a big thing about the user # being so 'early'.
It's in the 300's.
How many beta-testers would a site like that have and how long would they be doing it?
Not surprised in the least to learn of a 'regular' user whose number is way lower than 383.

Obviously that seems to very likely be the super-user account that could see the hole-cards. But why AP would wait until 382 other accounts had been made before adding on that super-user account struck me as odd.

[/ QUOTE ]

Presumably in the early testing stages they would need to test some large MTTs. Thus they would need several hundred accounts run the test. Why 363 in particular? Who knows. Perhaps they were all super accounts.

Re: Assumption of User #363 Being Alpha/Beta Testing Phase
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have SuperDuper User Account #84. It's possible that I was a beta tester, I simply don't remember--But at that point it was definitely very public--I don't believe for a second User #363 was an accidental beta testing backdoor--It was created on purpose after the fact.

[/ QUOTE ]

fyp...lol

Edit: Can you see the FTR cards too?

gg

Re: Assumption of User #363 Being Alpha/Beta Testing Phase
 

One of the theories put forth is that the "superuser" ability could be activated/deactivated with a few lines of code or whatever.
This would mean there aren't dedicated full time superuser accounts but that accounts with that capability could be used from time to time and then made to sleep when not needed.

It doesn't seem far-fetched, but doesn't answer how many accounts there are like that or how many people know how to activate them.