Absolute Poker Scandal: An Inside Job - Page 69

Clayton · #**681** 10-17-2007, 03:23 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ikestoys, Scott Tom has lied. And he, at least, used to be a big wig in the co. If I'm not mistaken he has an account on casinomeister right now for damage control saying a "superuser" account is absurd. He denied being Scott Tom, "pokermachine" here at 2+2. Adanthar exposed that they have identical IPs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I VERY seriously doubt The Watchdog is Pokermachine.

[/ QUOTE ]

but adanthar had pokermachine's login name as scotttom, with the exact same IP as the watchdog

ikestoys · #**682** 10-17-2007, 03:24 AM

waxhead- ignorance isn't necessarily lies. If I'm working in a lab investigating the acceleration of gravity and I make a mistake through incompetence, bad methods or bad data, then it isn't a lie. Althought its definitely possible, we haven't proven that yet

wax head · #**683** 10-17-2007, 03:25 AM

It's hard enough to believe incomptence explains the first official response. But can they really be denying the current evidence? Even just the hand histories, seriously?

ikestoys · #**684** 10-17-2007, 03:26 AM

[ QUOTE ]
to all of you who are pinning this on incompetence, or at least saying there's a chance, do you actually think that if they somehow realized what was going on they'd admit it, and risk their company going under?

[/ QUOTE ]
thats the rub... but I'm not sure that admitting that their security was briefly compromised will end the company as long as all aggrieved players are compensated.

basementproject · #**685** 10-17-2007, 03:30 AM

AP should get an independant party to audit the findings in the last couple of detective threads. See if they can find anything wrong with them.

ikestoys · #**686** 10-17-2007, 03:30 AM

[ QUOTE ]
It's hard enough to believe incomptence explains the first official response. But can they really be denying the current evidence? Even just the hand histories, seriously?

[/ QUOTE ]

they're first official response was your typical response when a player makes an accusation like this. Paraphrased: People get lucky in poker over the short term. I don't know what you mean by denying the HHs. The most recent allegations have brought about an external (how external we aren't sure) investigation. I'm not sure what a better result (at this current moment) that we could hope for.

wax head · #**687** 10-17-2007, 03:30 AM

[ QUOTE ]
waxhead- ignorance isn't necessarily lies. If I'm working in a lab investigating the acceleration of gravity and I make a mistake through incompetence, bad methods or bad data, then it isn't a lie. Althought its definitely possible, we haven't proven that yet

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea, I'm referring to the part where it's impossible for employees to see hole cards, but somehow they investigated hand histories that didn't go to showdown. Obviously, 'someone' can see hole cards!

They are being sly with their language there and referring to game client only.

Josem · #**688** 10-17-2007, 03:31 AM

If Absolute Poker were to claim that instead of being criminally complicit, they were merely criminally reckless, I would not be inclined to argue with them.

imabigdeal · #**689** 10-17-2007, 03:31 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
to all of you who are pinning this on incompetence, or at least saying there's a chance, do you actually think that if they somehow realized what was going on they'd admit it, and risk their company going under?

[/ QUOTE ]
thats the rub... but I'm not sure that admitting that their security was briefly compromised will end the company as long as all aggrieved players are compensated.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah. i mean don't get me wrong, part of me wishes this is just incompetence. and i think one person could be this stupid, but not a whole company. it's just too optimistic. i believe they will continue to try to push this under the rug and deny it as long as they have to. we'll see though.

ikestoys · #**690** 10-17-2007, 03:32 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
to all of you who are pinning this on incompetence, or at least saying there's a chance, do you actually think that if they somehow realized what was going on they'd admit it, and risk their company going under?

[/ QUOTE ]
thats the rub... but I'm not sure that admitting that their security was briefly compromised will end the company as long as all aggrieved players are compensated.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah. i mean don't get me wrong, part of me wishes this is just incompetence. and i think one person could be this stupid, but not a whole company. it's just too optimistic. i believe they will continue to try to push this under the rug and deny it as long as they have to. we'll see though.

[/ QUOTE ]
oh i didn't say they wouldn't try to hide it, I was questioning whether it would end the company (assuming that the investigation showed it wasn't them).