AP thread 87.1 - waiting on the statement ITT - Page 35

adanthar · #**341** 10-21-2007, 10:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
@ pokeraddict, that "hand history" I was send does not look like it's from AP at all, [censored] you and your libelist [censored]

There is still NO real evidence, just accusations against AP.
If you think public forum postings are evidence, your intelligence is definitely in question, at least as far as I am concerned.

[/ QUOTE ]

please be real

Arito · #**342** 10-21-2007, 10:54 AM

To clarify: I think Absolute should pay some kind of restitution to the players. They assured players their network was safe. If some one was cheating, especially if it was an inside job, AP needs to be responsible for the losses of the victims. Even if these losses far exceed the account balance of the cheater(s).

It would be a good signal to the players if AP offered additional restitution. Big prizepool freerolls to those affected, free stuff from a points store (hypothetically) or really lucrative bonuses. Whatever. I would expect them to do this, because it makes sense business-wise. They need to show reimburse the players for messing up.

However, I don't think that they are required to do so. And especially not in some of the ways mentioned (the 'what if' scenarios), because these are too subjective.

My main point was that the cheaters did not have a freeroll, they could very well face prison time, lost jobs etc. To treat that as a financial freeroll is looking at it from a really strange perspective.

whangarei · #**343** 10-21-2007, 11:01 AM

[ QUOTE ]

7) New (albeit minor) dramabomb I have been holding back: Those at the 2006 WSOP probably remember an AP booth in front of the Rio Amazon room, where they were giving away bags of popcorn. You were asked to give $1 for each popcorn bag, which was promised to go to a specific Las Vegas charity. According to a reliable source, this money, which added up to $10,000, was simply stolen by Scott Tom and friends, and never given to the charity! The source also told me that a longtime AP employee quit over this matter. While arguably minor compared to the 7-figure sum stolen in this scandal, this incident was despicable and cheated a good charity out of $10,000 of promised money. Since AP is all about repairing their image at the moment, I figured I'd take the time to right this wrong. NOTICE TO AP: If my reliable source was somehow incorrect about this, let me know and tell me which charity received the money. I will personally verify your claim and publicly apologize if wrong about this. However, I would be shocked if this information I was given was incorrect, given the high degree of reliability of this particular source.

[/ QUOTE ]

So sick. Was Scott Tom actually at the WSOP?

whangarei · #**344** 10-21-2007, 11:09 AM

[ QUOTE ]
lol, now you want to be paid for your time playing? I don't think that is going to fly.

[/ QUOTE ]

He's not asking to be paid for time playing. He is asking for compensation for whatever win/loss differential he experienced due to the fact that one of his opponents was a superuser. This obviously includes money he lost to the superuser. But there is a lot of merit to the claim that it should also include money he was expected to win from the superuser given the cards that were dealt. For completeness, it should also take into consideration money he won from the superuser by calling down light when the superuser expected to be able to bluff him off his hand. Obviously an exact figure would be difficult to come by. I agree some reasonable premium above the money directly lost to the superuser is appropriate.

sitout · #**345** 10-21-2007, 11:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

7) New (albeit minor) dramabomb I have been holding back: Those at the 2006 WSOP probably remember an AP booth in front of the Rio Amazon room, where they were giving away bags of popcorn. You were asked to give $1 for each popcorn bag, which was promised to go to a specific Las Vegas charity. According to a reliable source, this money, which added up to $10,000, was simply stolen by Scott Tom and friends, and never given to the charity! The source also told me that a longtime AP employee quit over this matter. While arguably minor compared to the 7-figure sum stolen in this scandal, this incident was despicable and cheated a good charity out of $10,000 of promised money. Since AP is all about repairing their image at the moment, I figured I'd take the time to right this wrong. NOTICE TO AP: If my reliable source was somehow incorrect about this, let me know and tell me which charity received the money. I will personally verify your claim and publicly apologize if wrong about this. However, I would be shocked if this information I was given was incorrect, given the high degree of reliability of this particular source.

[/ QUOTE ]

So sick. Was Scott Tom actually at the WSOP?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe that's how he bought his ticket [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

ugaistheteam · #**346** 10-21-2007, 11:15 AM

I recieved a phone call from Roger last night. This morning I had the extra 500 in my account.

whangarei · #**347** 10-21-2007, 11:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I want to remind AP, that if we have to wait another day, you have to give up another frat boy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

marimba man · #**348** 10-21-2007, 11:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
lol, now you want to be paid for your time playing? I don't think that is going to fly.

[/ QUOTE ]

He's not asking to be paid for time playing. He is asking for compensation for whatever win/loss differential he experienced due to the fact that one of his opponents was a superuser. This obviously includes money he lost to the superuser. But there is a lot of merit to the claim that it should also include money he was expected to win from the superuser given the cards that were dealt. For completeness, it should also take into consideration money he won from the superuser by calling down light when the superuser expected to be able to bluff him off his hand. Obviously an exact figure would be difficult to come by. I agree some reasonable premium above the money directly lost to the superuser is appropriate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely disagree with Dan's point because if they weren't superusers they wouldn't be playing. Asking for more money is unreasonable and will never be accepted anyway so it's not really a point worth arguing over.

Cruzincat · #**349** 10-21-2007, 11:28 AM

While I never had enough money in AP at the time this was going on to be affected, whenever I could, I did try to get a decent BR in the Wed night VIP Freeroll. Granted, there was no outlay there, but I am wondering if 363 was involved with any of those in order to start his BR. Qualifying for the VIP freeroll could in itself be considered a form of outlay. Just wondering, I won't pursue AP for anything on this, but if they look into it and find people who might have been knocked out by one of these accounts, maybe something a litle more than the $10 they give out to non-active players would be nice.

zen_rounder · #**350** 10-21-2007, 11:37 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
just in... gambling911 proves once again they are useful

[/ QUOTE ]

OMG, according to this link AP are now claiming Scott Tom was never CEO. lol

[/ QUOTE ]it also states that he did indeed have an account.. that in itself is unethical regardless of anything else. equivelent of lee jones sitting at 25/50 on stars playing cash..