Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Two Plus Two > MOD DISCUSSION

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 10-15-2007, 09:52 PM
Shooz Shooz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 64
Default Re: Stars Conclusion

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Because it wasn't her playing the account genius and I'm more than happy for ka$ino to now be winning the money.
You argue that they are innocent but then say if they were 11th they wouldn't be caught, please try posting something logical in future. Yes more than likely some other cheats went under the radar but this one got caught winning the event which is a very good thing for all concerned.

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all how do you know she wasn't playing ? come up with some evidence before you state something, even pokerstars can't state this ? I was just saying come up with a hypotethical reason for it PLEASE. Second of all going out with theese statements 'genius' so 'dumb' and so on, there's just one sollution A IQ TEST COMBAT, lol.
I will be back later im going on dinner now.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't need to come up with a scenario, Pokerstars have already done that and proven it behind the scenes, it may not be in their security interests to tell you how. Do you think Stars have done this for a giggle? It's terrible business for them, they would probably pay out another million for him/them to be proven totally innocent.
Let's try getting back to your reason for assuming total innocence even though all the common sense factors point to otherwise??
  #92  
Old 10-15-2007, 09:53 PM
saraya saraya is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8
Default Re: Stars Conclusion

use ur common sense to come up with one behind the scene scenario
  #93  
Old 10-15-2007, 09:58 PM
Shooz Shooz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 64
Default Re: Stars Conclusion

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
completely agree with shooz... saraya, what makes you think that Stars would take measures like this so frivolously? They stand absolutely nothing to gain, they are obviously not keeping the money. I believe that they acted in the manner that they did because they had more than enough reason to do so... Do you really think a site like theirs would risk their reputation over a minor offense???

[/ QUOTE ]

If they would let the money go to The V0id, there would be a huge dispute over that it actually is ok to not follow the rules, since everybody seem to think she did something wrong, ofcourse they're not going to let the money go, they want to show an example right here right now, that you HAVE to follow the rules of pokerstars, this is perfect for them, human animals getting happy because she just lost 1.2m PLUS that they're showing EVERYBODY that you must obey the rules, altough they still dont have any evidence. Letting the money go would be worse than keeping it, also this makes people happy as it is increasing prize money, since the winner didn't mean anything for the commercial side of pokerstars, they found no use in it also. They are just doing what they think is the best for the company.

[/ QUOTE ]
oh boy where do I start om this one???
you think this is some kind of conspiracy and all us random forum people just decided to pick on ''her'' without any reason??? I didn't even know the account was in his sisters name when I heard it was him multi-accounting...
''winner didn't mean anything for the commericial side of pokerstars'' is about the worst thing you've come up with so far, have you heard of Chris Moneymaker???
Thank goodness I'm going to bed now so everyone else can field your next effort...
  #94  
Old 10-15-2007, 09:59 PM
Shooz Shooz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 64
Default Re: Stars Conclusion

[ QUOTE ]
use ur common sense to come up with one behind the scene scenario

[/ QUOTE ]
Mark Telscher was sitting at a computer playing the WCOOP ME on an account under his sisters name who wasn't in the same country at the time.
*that is purely a guess to appease saraya btw
now you tell us why you believe she/he is innocent?? I'll look forward to that in the AM...
  #95  
Old 10-15-2007, 10:03 PM
apefish apefish is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: To the pain
Posts: 4,673
Default Re: Stars Conclusion

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
use ur common sense to come up with one behind the scene scenario

[/ QUOTE ]
Mark Telscher was sitting at a computer playing the WCOOP ME on an account under his sisters name who wasn't in the same country at the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or the other one I posted- which is that straw accounts fail to pass the sniff test when other factors tend to point to repeated violations of the terms of service.
  #96  
Old 10-15-2007, 10:15 PM
1-outed 1-outed is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3
Default Re: Stars Conclusion

What makes you think that they do not have any evidence??? The fact that they haven't written you a personalized letter revealing propietary information about how they investigate these matters, or confidential information about the player's account, just to convince you that you are wrong??? Do you really expect me to believe that just because that there is information that they cannot share with us for what must be legal reasons, that they are intentionally trying to screw an "honest" player out of their prize money??? I'm sorry but, just because this is my first day posting here, doesn't mean I was born yesterday...
  #97  
Old 10-15-2007, 10:36 PM
imabigdeal imabigdeal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hating shortstackers
Posts: 1,008
Default Re: Stars Conclusion

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Certain things have to be clarified, Stephen W wrote
1. The account that won the WCOOP main event was played from the same computer and the same IP from the start of the tournament until the finish.
2. No other account played from this same IP or computer, during the tournament.

Having stated the above, there are still serious open questions that require the investigation to continue.

Now multiaccounting seems to be out of the question, so where are the evidence that the void should be discqualified ?, and more what about the other probably 500 players that actually were multiaccounting, no further investigation is made upon them, or maybe someone used some other players account. There are no evidence saying anything about any kind of cheating whatsoever. Just not enough evidence saying it was her, that's going a little bit to far. It seems like alot of people in this forum seem enjoyment in people losing money or getting devastated from a loss, ofcourse jealousness is of human nature and people to choose to act like an animal are welcome to, but guess what making this girl lose 1.2m dollars are not going to make your life better. In fact it's not even going to change her life, just a depression of not getting something, and the WCOOP title she was entitled to. There were at least two players on the final table, that i know that were not following the rules of pokerstars. Now The V0id account has followed all rules and there are no evidence pointing on that it was not her playing, altough there are plenty of evidence pointing out other players, and no further investigation are made upon theese players?
It seems like pokerstars are going after the forums reading what the people have to say about it, what kind of company would do such a rdicioulus investigation, and ignore other players actually not obeying the rules?

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks for your input Mark

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed. you got caught dude. some people get caught, some don't. get over it
  #98  
Old 10-15-2007, 11:44 PM
Emsterdad Emsterdad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 160
Default Re: Stars Conclusion (short answer = void is owned)

If I was him I would crash course my sister in tournament poker 24/7 for as long as it takes to make it plausable and take stars to court gangsta-style!
  #99  
Old 10-16-2007, 12:43 AM
betgo betgo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 15,430
Default Re: Stars Conclusion (short answer = void is owned)

[ QUOTE ]
If I was him I would crash course my sister in tournament poker 24/7 for as long as it takes to make it plausable and take stars to court gangsta-style!

[/ QUOTE ]
lol. Which court?
  #100  
Old 10-16-2007, 04:25 AM
saraya saraya is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8
Default Re: Stars Conclusion (short answer = void is owned)

first of all im not mark teltscher, let a OP check up my IP adress and they can link me to Las Vegas, Bellagio. Mark Teltscher lives in London, UK. further than that mark teltscher was just in barcelona, and he's probably sleeping right now. I'm just here from an above perspective since everybody seems to think that the right thing to do was to disqualify the void, im just saying what doesnt point out 200 other players in this tournament should be disqualified as well?, seems to me like people want to disqualify the void just because they dont like Mark Teltscher? this is not about hate or love, its about doing the right thing, anyhow of course im sure pokerstars made a good investigation I just dont understand how they can prove anyone guilty without evidence enough? in fact the account The Void was not multiaccounting, what could be worse than multiaccounting ?
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 01:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.