Stars vs. Party cheater-funds confiscation policy

[EliotSpitzer]

Lee Jones over at Stars has completed his investigation of ZeeJustin and has determined that ZJ cheated honest players out of $5,000. PokerStars has decided to only confiscate $5K from ZJ's account and to let him cash out the rest. To me, this is inviting cheaters to play on Stars becaue the cheater is only risking their illicit gains and can then open an account in another person's name when they get banned. Thus, the cheater is essentially risking nothing. Please participate in this poll to let Lee know how you feel about PokerStars policy vis-a-vis Party's:

[BluffTHIS!]

Restitution and banning alone isn't enough. Punitive punishment is needed as an effective deterrent.

[soah]

Your logic is only valid if the tournament is a freeroll. Paying money to enter a tournament is certainly risking something.

Would you pay to enter a tournament if there was a (make up a number) percent chance that your winnings would be confiscated?

[Davey]

I didnt read all those huge threads but did Party ever say how much was taken from ZeeJustin. I read one post where he said it was 100K or so but did Party ever say what was from cheating? Im just asking because how do you the policies are different? What if Justin won all of that through cheating, wouldnt that make the policy the same?

[BluffTHIS!]

Party took 100K of cheated winnings from JJProd and an additional 40K. Similarly I don't remember the exact numbers either on ZJ, but they took over and above detected cheated winnings.

[Davey]

Thanks for the info. I guess I still like Partys policy, if all you have to lose if what you win from those specific tournaments where you got caught cheating and not being able to play under your name on that site anymore I dont think it is as effective as what Party did.

[EliotSpitzer]

[ QUOTE ]
Your logic is only valid if the tournament is a freeroll. Paying money to enter a tournament is certainly risking something.

[/ QUOTE ]

What percentage of cheaters do you suspect are caught? I'm guessing around 5%. Stars would've never found out about ZJ if Party hadn't investigated hime first. Cheaters are risking very little considering the current surveillance conducted by the poker sites.

[ QUOTE ]
Would you pay to enter a tournament if there was a (make up a number) percent chance that your winnings would be confiscated?

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. I would happily pay to enter a tournament where there was a 100% chance that a multi-accounter's winnings would be confiscated. Single-accounters have no risk of having their funds confiscated.

[BluffTHIS!]

It's heartening to see that thus far only 2 cheaters or cheater-sympathizers have voted no on the last question.

[soah]

Making up arbitrary numbers is not a very convincing argument, nor is it relevent to the conclusion that you've outlined. You have claimed that a cheater risks nothing when he invests his own money in a cheating enterprise which could result in him losing 100% of his investment. I eagerly await your explanation of how it can simultaneously be true that he risks nothing, but that he might lose his own money.

[Phil153]

Stars only took the money he gained illictly (5K) and let him cash out the rest. Lee Jones said as much in his post. Where's the risk? If the chance of getting caught is <100%, cheating is +EV. Simple.