Whats up with the Odds maker bannner? - Page 5

B00T · #41 09-26-2007, 10:23 AM

jek is unquestionably right

they may of saved face, but its disappointing they made the decision they did as jek pointed out

ur54sold · #42 09-26-2007, 11:20 AM

Lets face it... if a company such as two+two has a choice between making $money$ or retaining "respect" from its users, money will always be the choice. As with any business..... c$ck suc$ers

NajdorfDefense · #43 09-26-2007, 01:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
jek is unquestionably right

they may of saved face, but its disappointing they made the decision they did as jek pointed out

[/ QUOTE ]

I am assuming they learned a lesson here, and once they did they fixed it. I don't expect 2p2 to be perfect. Yes, the initial decision could have been better, but now we know that Matt asked them for details and was summarily ignored. Now posters know. Good.

Mason Malmuth · #44 09-26-2007, 04:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see how 2+2 retained much respect here. They didn't do any research into an utterly shady sponsor, and are directly responsible for at the very least one poster (and let's face, probably more that we haven't heard from) depositing money into said utterly shady operation.

[/ QUOTE ]

But it only took me 30 seconds to reject the rakeback/affiliate proposal you sent us.

MM

Thremp · #45 09-26-2007, 04:39 PM

Meh... 2p2 made a bad decision and rectified it by pulling the ads. Seems standard to me.

B00T · #46 09-26-2007, 04:40 PM

nice to make a joke out of something that your own customers are trying to help you out with since you didn't do it yourselves

and yes I am aware of who jek is and his background

MyTurn2Raise · #47 09-26-2007, 05:10 PM

was a funny comment by Mason and I appreciate the humor besides him being a real cool guy that has led to these forums

but, I think it would be better if 2p2 stepped up and guaranteed that one poster his original deposit back if that poster can prove he deposited and that he tried to withdrawal

kdog · #48 09-27-2007, 12:12 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't see how 2+2 retained much respect here. They didn't do any research into an utterly shady sponsor, and are directly responsible for at the very least one poster (and let's face, probably more that we haven't heard from) depositing money into said utterly shady operation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But it only took me 30 seconds to reject the rakeback/affiliate proposal you sent us.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no doubt this is true Mason as you have always been a pretty straight shooter on these boards. But jek does have a point. This site has a reputation for integrity unrivaled by any other poker/gambling message board/forum around. And you guys dropped the ball on this one.

PropPlayer · #49 09-27-2007, 12:25 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I am assuming they learned a lesson here, and once they did they fixed it. I don't expect 2p2 to be perfect. Yes, the initial decision could have been better, but now we know that Matt asked them for details and was summarily ignored. Now posters know. Good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree.

2+2 is a solid B+ approaching A rating in my own personal rating guide [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]. Even B+ sites make some mistakes - All is cool.

NajdorfDefense · #50 09-27-2007, 12:27 AM

[ QUOTE ]
was a funny comment by Mason and I appreciate the humor besides him being a real cool guy that has led to these forums

but, I think it would be better if 2p2 stepped up and guaranteed that one poster his original deposit back if that poster can prove he deposited and that he tried to withdrawal

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent point.