We haven't won yet: latest (10/19) cliff's notes on AP scandal

[___1___]

[ QUOTE ]
Here are the new questions to ask AP:

1) If this was a rogue employee trying to prove a point that the site could be compromised, why not do it at play money instead of the highest real money games?

2) Furthermore, if he was looking to prove something, why not just do it ONCE and show his managers what he did?

3) How does chip dumping fit into all of this?

4) Why were 4 accounts necessary to "prove" this? Why did this reoccur over a period of nearly 4 weeks?

5) Why did the initial "conclusive" investigation totally discount the possibility of a superuser?

6) How could the hand histories have been actually looked at and concluded to not have been cheating, when even relative poker novices can see the POTRIPPER tournament and see something is wrong?

7) Who was actually registered to GRAYCAT, STEAMROLLER, DOUBLEDRAG, and POTRIPPER?

8) Explain the process in how Scott Tom was framed. How was it done so perfectly?

9) Why was a compromise only admitted AFTER 2+2 obtained too much smoking proof to continue the denial process?

[/ QUOTE ]

These questions need to be answered. ESPECIALLY #4 (at least to me). I really can't believe AP is spinning this as a rogue programmer trying to prove management wrong. It makes NO sense whatsoever.

I feel like I'm watching the OJ trial all over again. I really hope he doesn't get off this time.