Media Coverage of AP scandal: Good or bad - Page 6

kleath · #51 10-19-2007, 04:36 PM

Imo stars and Full Tilt need to come out and say thats bs, we dont pull that [censored], you're safe with us, something like that worded better obviously.

freecard4all · #52 10-19-2007, 04:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So no, I'm not advocating a cover-up or anything like that.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. Cover-ups hurt more than anything else.

But be aware of the consequences.
NEVER EVER tell the public this became a problem because there was a retard playing every hand.
NEVER EVER tell the public this became a problem because there was a someone who won 100times what can be a resonable winning.

The only think I'm scared of are donks (lagtards and fish):
1) it tells the LAGs that their play is NO NO and they can win this way only by cheating
2) if you win too much you get accused (you know what the variance do when it comes to LAGs).

So spread the word, but protect LAGs and fish.

PMR · #53 10-19-2007, 05:00 PM

This story is now one of the "top picks" on MSN's front page. Link to story:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21381022/?GT1=10450

Double Eagle · #54 10-19-2007, 05:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
This story is now one of the "top picks" on MSN's front page. Link to story:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21381022/?GT1=10450

[/ QUOTE ]

Mr. Brunker:

As someone who makes his living playing poker online, I was extremely nervous about the tone of the inevitable mass media coverage of the Absolute Poker cheating scandal. I want to express my appreciation for the thoughtfulness of your approach as well as the clarity you brought to the underlying issues of the story. I fear that by the time this has played out the quality of your coverage may end up being the exception rather than the rule , but it is encouraging to see the bar being set so high.

I look forward to your continued work on this story, thanks again for your efforts.

Regards,

Double Eagle

Death Valley · #55 10-19-2007, 05:37 PM

We survived Propoker, we can survive this

Jack10 · #56 10-19-2007, 06:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think in the short term it will be bad, but not horrible, and the games won't dry up

longterm I think the outlook is good

absolute's outlook might suck, but I think online poker will be fine

[/ QUOTE ]
Why? Reasoning behind all statements except for "absolute's outlook might suck" would be appreciated. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

John Ho · #57 10-19-2007, 06:55 PM

I can't speak for others or the future of the industry, but for myself I will not play poker online for any decent stakes until poker sites are based and regulated in the U.S. or Europe and the poker site is a public company. There has clearly not been the attention to detail that is required to run an online gambling site.
But then again I'm no longer a pro player. If I were a pro I guess I'd have no other choice unless I was playing high enough to make the nosebleed live games worth giving up the multi-table aspect of online play.
But I have to say I'm shocked that this happened. I don't think anyone who knows me would call me naive but I am surprised that security could be so lax.
I guess there are legitimate reasons to allow employees to see all hole cards in real time but I would think they would force there to be at least a couple of high level users to authorize this before it could happen. To allow one rogue person free reign over the system like that is just plain stupid.

freecard4all · #58 10-19-2007, 07:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I will not play poker online for any decent stakes until poker sites are based and regulated in the U.S. or Europe and the poker site is a public company. There has clearly not been the attention to detail that is required to run an online gambling site.

[/ QUOTE ]
As of public companies, I advise you to do so. The more people that give way to the public companies the better.
BTW. this is the good outlook.

As of the US/EU regulations I really don't care. It's more of the third-party trustworthiness than the origin.

BTW. the trustworthy third-party reviews are again the good outlook of this.

john kane · #59 10-19-2007, 07:30 PM

how would it ever be good for the media to find out about this? when we need to attract new fishy players, the last thing we want is the media telling potential new players that others have been cheated out of a huge amount of money.

not a huge disaster, but bad nonetheless.

MicroBob · #60 10-19-2007, 07:47 PM

I think the msnbc.com article about this was really well-written. Even addresses this specific issue of how those in online-poker feared it would be a black-eye for the industry which continues to surge despite the UIGEA.
Also that the players consider the sites to be safe.

Issue I had with the article is that it specifically mentions a couple guys from 2+2 but does not mention the site...but when they mention the guy from P5's they go out of their way to mention that site.
Thought 2+2 itself deserved some of the publiciity as well as P5's but whatever. Overall it appeared the article was pretty accurate and did not portray online-poker in nearly as negative a light as I would have feared.

Haven't seen the articles on any other sites but I'm hoping and almost assuming they are going to be roughly as good.

I'm far less concerned with the potential for pro-UIGEA fire-power from this situation than I was previously. They might still use it for their purposes of course. But I'm liking the tone of the msnbc.com article that doesn't appear to portray online-poker in too negative a light despite this ridiculously embarassing and serious situation.