AP Spokesman Mark Seif Video Interview Oct 26 - Page 8

zen_rounder · #71 10-27-2007, 02:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If he appears to be guilty. He is guilty.
If he looks guilty. He is guilty.
Just because there's no evidence to exonerate him. He's guilty.
Salem was over run by witches at one time too. They took care of them with no evidence. Hmmm.

What happened to innocent until proved guilty?

Glad you bunch aren't on a jury in a real criminal case....

[/ QUOTE ]

trial:jury::scandal:2p2 ?

I like your presumption that INTERNET MESSAGE BOARDS should act like TRIAL JURIES. Have you been to teh Internets before? Should we all start talking in legalese like the other troll?

BTW, aren't lawyers supposed to be good at convincing people? I think I might see why Seif is not more litigious.

[/ QUOTE ]prob used to suck at being a lawyer and played poker instead. he came off awful in that interveiw [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

pineapple888 · #72 10-27-2007, 02:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If he appears to be guilty. He is guilty.
If he looks guilty. He is guilty.
Just because there's no evidence to exonerate him. He's guilty.
Salem was over run by witches at one time too. They took care of them with no evidence. Hmmm.

What happened to innocent until proved guilty?

Glad you bunch aren't on a jury in a real criminal case....

[/ QUOTE ]

1.) This isn't a criminal case. Yet.
2.) People ARE allowed to form opinions, regardless of whether you approve.

bronx bomber · #73 10-27-2007, 02:29 PM

Let me ask all of you a question. Do you believe that Mark was unaware of the allegations about Stuckinpigh when they were made in 06? I find it hard to believe that railbirds or other HL players didn't bring this to his attention then. Lately Mark seems very concerned about his reputation. I am just curious that Mark (if he was aware of this at the time) did nothing to address these accusations at the time. Or was it maybe a case of letting sleeping dogs lie? I am just speculating here, but it seems that the ONLY reason it wasn't addressed at that time is because Mark, if he got involved, would have to provide HH's. In the convo with the AP Korea guy, the tech says someting about moving servers or something (not a tech guy) and Mark says, yeah right(?). Like he was tech savvy. Is it possible Mark knew the retention date on HH's and didn't respond at that time for this reason? Why wait until now to start addressing the issue?

Also, I am still very curious about Mark's earnings pre and post Stuckinpigh- can someone post this going back say 3 years with the date of the Stuckinpigh allegations? Thanks

Suigin406 · #74 10-27-2007, 02:41 PM

like others said, i was pissed when he brought the name of stars and FT into this, that is an absolute (!) cheap shot and looks bad to the average person who is following this...

what a [censored] move in a [censored] performance

Kiddmother · #75 10-27-2007, 02:43 PM

hmmm, Mark says in the video that Absolute should err on the side of overpaying clients account's. . . .and there is a client who had questionable play with Mark and the hand histories can't be obtained because of error on Absolute's part, , , , , I'd say this is an opportunity for him to have Absolute credit the client's account for the amount lost. He wouldn't even have to say whether he is guilty or not. Just say that since there is questions and the hand histories can't be produced, Absolute, being the stand-up company that it is, will err on the side of the customer!!! Put up or shut up!!!!

highhustla · #76 10-27-2007, 02:52 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Eh honestly guys theres not much here, mark seif is a [censored] awkward guy-- he has shifty, bulging eyes when he sits at the poker table, and he doesnt seem like a very social guy so these interviews are probably nerve racking for him.

/end thread

[x] Trainwrecked

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed. I dont think he came off bad or douchey in the interview. What the [censored] does everyone expect him to say or do? Oh wait, no one really cares, they just want to pile it on and string him up. Carry on with the group think guys

[/ QUOTE ]

btw, can you please link us to the video that you watched?

losingdonkey · #77 10-27-2007, 03:04 PM

If I ever saw mark seif I would mug him

FoxInTheHenHouse · #78 10-27-2007, 03:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If he appears to be guilty. He is guilty.
If he looks guilty. He is guilty.
Just because there's no evidence to exonerate him. He's guilty.
Salem was over run by witches at one time too. They took care of them with no evidence. Hmmm.

What happened to innocent until proved guilty?

Glad you bunch aren't on a jury in a real criminal case....

[/ QUOTE ]

1.) This isn't a criminal case. Yet.
2.) People ARE allowed to form opinions, regardless of whether you approve.

[/ QUOTE ]

Opinion and slander. a fine line that's probably been crossed....

highhustla · #79 10-27-2007, 03:31 PM

1. you don't know what slander means
2. no

bocablkr · #80 10-27-2007, 03:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Eh honestly guys theres not much here, mark seif is a [censored] awkward guy-- he has shifty, bulging eyes when he sits at the poker table, and he doesnt seem like a very social guy so these interviews are probably nerve racking for him.

/end thread

[x] Trainwrecked

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed. I dont think he came off bad or douchey in the interview. What the [censored] does everyone expect him to say or do? Oh wait, no one really cares, they just want to pile it on and string him up. Carry on with the group think guys

[/ QUOTE ]

Have to agree also, what video are the rest of you watching. Nothing in that video made me think he was guilty. He may be but the video doesn't condemn him.