Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Internet Gambling > Internet Gambling
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-17-2007, 10:45 PM
Josem Josem is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 4,780
Default A Fair Poker Site Dispute Resolution Process

In the "mr gatorade" thread, I made a post (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...umber=10797335) that suggested a couple of possible systems to balance:

a) the right of poker sites to police their terms and conditions;

b) the value in keeping confidential bot detection process from bot makers; and

c) the right of customers to be treated fairly

Here were two ideas in 10 seconds of consideration:

1) Employ a retired US judge who is attracted by the idea of spending their latter years in the Caribbean, and get him to serve as an arbiter in disputes (a number of western-Pacific Islands use this for their criminal legal system, using Australian & New Zealand judges)

2) Establish an independent, expert, "bot judging authority", possibly in conjunction with other sites. Have seven directors - three nominated by poker sites, three nominated by players, and an independent chair nominated by the six other directors. Perhaps one of the directors nominated by 2p2, one nominated by P5s, one nominated by Cardplayer.


This were just a couple of ideas/examples without a great deal of thought. What do you folks reckon? Ways to improve these systems? Alternative ideas?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-17-2007, 11:15 PM
Humbled Humbled is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 96
Default Re: A Fair Poker Site Dispute Resolution Process

sounds good in theory but I doubt it will ever happen. I like the idea though...
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-17-2007, 11:58 PM
bouglas bouglas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 108
Default Re: A Fair Poker Site Dispute Resolution Process

Who would pay for the employment of these people? My initial thought would be a share between all the interested parties, however it does raise some questions about how serious some of the smaller operators would be about participating in such an arrangement. For example Party is leading the way in abiding by the new laws and has made public statements that it encourages full market regulation and they are willing to "put their money where their mouth is" in terms of being involved in setting up this regulated structure. Those other operators in the top 5 have clearly shunned even the thought of behaving in line with policies, so I think the main problem is that there is no indication that even the bigger players are interested in having a regulated body (this is not exactly what you are suggesting I realise, but something similar).
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.