View Single Post
  #379  
Old 10-18-2007, 03:58 PM
Oski Oski is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 2,230
Default Re: Updated Cliff Notes On Absolute Poker Scandal (18th October)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
IT TOOK A LONG time because soooo many people will defend online poker "not being rigged" untill they day they die.. That turns over into people not looking for "wrongs" such as this occuring. We have no one to thank but ourselves for shumming the [censored] outta people when they bring up a post that says something isnt right.

We simply tell them to get a million hand sample then come back... by then the cheating may have been obscured.... or the player cheating them accoutns changed... therefor the player just appears to suck at poker and everyone is being hurt a little bit at a time. But [censored] adds up over time....

Many of you (us) need to take a look in the miror and think of how many time (you) us shunned a player posting with less then 10 posts and called him out...

as stated before if done right, carefully, the cheaters MAY have never been caught.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is complete nonsense. Demanding evidence of wrongdoing is absolutely the right thing to do.

Think about it, in the entire history of online poker there have been approximately seventeen billion accusations of things not being kosher and this is the second time something has been funky with a site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Keep in mind, that despite the early evidence in September, the big break occurred because AP released Hand Histories with classified info.

Now, going back through time, wouldn't it be nice to have this type of info to investigate the other claims. ** Understand, I am sure 99.9% of those cheating theories were true tin-foil hat stuff, but logically, there could be a lot more incidents that could have been discovered but for the classified information.

Overall, the party line was always "Why would a site cheat? they make so much money, they have so much to lose! Therefore, ANY accusation of cheating that involves the site is patently absurd." I think this prophylactic argument is definitely flawed as is the follow up argument that "if you make any accusation of cheating that involves the site, you must be a tin-foil hat wearing idiot."