Cheating at AP, updated cliff notes

[apefish]

Druff-

While i understand wanting compensation for being cheated, I don't think you can speak for the community of players beyond that narrow topic.

No way in hell I stop talking about this if you guys get your money back.
No way in hell I ever think anything other than they are a bunch of liars and coverup artists.
I think my view on that is pretty mainstream.

In this rare instance where the online community can make a direction changing impact on a rogue site you are satisfied with a reset to the status quo of 6 weeks ago?

Seriously?

[BowToYourSensei]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
wow, reading the comments on digg is very depressing and why I wish this never would have made the front page.

so much for any new fish anytime soon

[/ QUOTE ]
imo it's not as bad as you think it is

lapoker is right, fish who want to gamble will still play. people who thought it was rigged before will still think it's rigged, and weren't going to play anyway.

imo the vocal group is going to be the latter. that's expected. christ, it's the digg comment section, i wouldn't call it an accurate cross-section of the casual poker player demographic

[/ QUOTE ]

couldn't have said it better myself

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]

I would still hold out for a full admission from Absolute.

[/ QUOTE ]

Easy for those of us with no financial stake in this to say...not saying you're wrong, but I think it's offsides to go around accusing DD of being "paid off" because he's trying to find a solution which gets him a not-insignificant amount of money back.

Edit: that said, I agree with the above in stating that DD doesn't necessarily represent the interests of the poker community as a whole either...

[Synergistic Explosions]

First and foremost, AP needs to return fully the funds that were siphoned from legit players by accounts using the ability to see the hole cards. This is a must before anything else can be addressed to minimize the situation.

Until the stolen money is returned, AP remains complicit in the theft themselves, as they have guaranteed the sites security to it's players.

[nath]

Dan,

I think the bigger problem is that, even if they gave the money back, with the amount of information that's already public (the digg articles and youtube video, for example), it's going to be impossible for a reasonable person to examine it and then determine that Absolute's Official Position that no "Superuser" account exists or existed is honest.

[CCx]

Druff, out of curiosity... how much money did you lose to the accounts in question?

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
Dan,

I think the bigger problem is that, even if they gave the money back, with the amount of information that's already public (the digg articles and youtube video, for example), it's going to be impossible for a reasonable person to examine it and then determine that Absolute's Official Position that no "Superuser" account exists or existed is honest.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. And there are so many other poker rooms, I don't see what they'll have to offer at that point. It's impossible for them to do anything at this point to give the impression of a square game, so the only way they survive is if the masses don't give a [censored], which they can exert zero control over.

[PartyGirlUK]

Druff I think you underestimate

i) How pissed off people are at being lied to/cover up
ii) How willing people are to forgive if they are told the truth and reforms are implemented.

[kitchma]

AP's only viable option at this point is to come completely clean. They need to: i)Repay the stolen money, ii) tell us exactly what happened, iii) how it happened, and iv) what they are going to do to prevent it from happening again.

I understand that they may not survive by doing that, but it seems certain they will wither if they don't.

[niss]

[ QUOTE ]
You guys are living in a dreamworld if you think AP will admit to a superuser. They won't. They might as well turn off their servers and shut down if they admit that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with this at all. I play high stakes Omaha. I can accept that the sites I play have ways to counteract cheating, collusion, etc., or to mark the operation of the site's software, that may involve them being able to see my cards and watch me play. What I don't accept is that such an ability might be used by someone (especially someone affiliated with the site) to fleece me.

So the notion of a superuser account does not disturb me. The notion that a site does not have adequate controls in place, to ensure that such a superuser account is used for nothing other than proper ends, disturbs me.