AP Visit: I'm going to Costa Rica

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
Nat,

(Expanding on lapoker's suggestions)

Go down there, have Absolute pay your expenses + the fee, which you donate to charity. Take snaggle w/ you and party w/ him, don't go out w/ the Absolute guys socially.

Write a profile/feature on AP and this trip, give the exclusive to Bluff and have them pay you for it.

You are now uncompromised and will stand for integrity in the online poker world and open communications between poker sites and the poker community.

You might not be able to represent 2+2 posters, but you'll be able to represent the online poker playing community.

Edited to add: Have snaggle paid directly by AP, everybody knows he can be bought cheap anyway, so it doesn't matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this thinking. The only suggestion I have to change it is that instead of giving the money to charity, it funds a web page with the details of the this scandal that will be up for as long as the money lasts.

Alternatively, the fee could be used as seed money for a watchdog group of some kind, perhaps in conjunction with the webpage.

[imabigdeal]

[ QUOTE ]
Nat,

(Expanding on lapoker's suggestions)

Go down there, have Absolute pay your expenses + the fee, which you donate to charity. Take snaggle w/ you and party w/ him, don't go out w/ the Absolute guys socially.

Write a profile/feature on AP and this trip, give the exclusive to Bluff and have them pay you for it.

You are now uncompromised and will stand for integrity in the online poker world and open communications between poker sites and the poker community.

You might not be able to represent 2+2 posters, but you'll be able to represent the online poker playing community.

Edited to add: Have snaggle paid directly by AP, everybody knows he can be bought cheap anyway, so it doesn't matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol this is brilliant!

[lawsoncb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then he represents the "POSTERS" on the 2P2 forums.


[/ QUOTE ]

No. He represents himself. There is no official mechanism for someone to represent the posters.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

This may be 20 pages later and he may have chosen not he make the trip due to a bunch of idiots who have question his integrity, but he represents me weather that be as a poster of the 2+2 community or a member of the poker community.

Nat, I hope you or one of the others who are the reason we (2+2/poker community) are were we are in this investigation make the decision to make the trip to CR at the expense of AP.

There is no doubt in my mind that any of yall can not be bought off in this.

[waveydavey]

[ QUOTE ]
I like this thinking. The only suggestion I have to change it is that instead of giving the money to charity, it funds a web page with the details of the this scandal that will be up for as long as the money lasts.

Alternatively, the fee could be used as seed money for a watchdog group of some kind, perhaps in conjunction with the webpage.

[/ QUOTE ]
Talking about a watchdog group, what effect would they have that already hasn't been achieved here? (Besides not having the likes of Nat et. al. doing this for free and on their own time.) And by this I mean what power do we have now, or could gain from such a watchdog? It's clear there was cheating, it's even been admitted, but so what if you can't prosecute? Certainly pressure is being brought to bear on AP, otherwise they wouldn't be offering refunds, but they're not going to go further with this than they feel they have to, and that will likely fall short of what needs to be done.

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow Nat seriously idk how people wouldn't trust your opinion after all this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was in the minority suggesting that Nat taking AP up on their offer was not a good idea. But it has nothing to do with not trusting Nat's opinion. We all owe Nat (and Ad, Druff, etc) a great deal of gratitude. I am sure Nat would act beyond reproach and present a fair summary of his visit. But really there is nothing to be gained. As others have mentioned, he does not have the time, resources, experience etc to gather significant intelligence. AP just wants to piggyback his good name to help restore their reputation. I don't see the value in being complicit with their PR strategy.

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I like this thinking. The only suggestion I have to change it is that instead of giving the money to charity, it funds a web page with the details of the this scandal that will be up for as long as the money lasts.

Alternatively, the fee could be used as seed money for a watchdog group of some kind, perhaps in conjunction with the webpage.

[/ QUOTE ]
Talking about a watchdog group, what effect would they have that already hasn't been achieved here? (Besides not having the likes of Nat et. al. doing this for free and on their own time.) And by this I mean what power do we have now, or could gain from such a watchdog? It's clear there was cheating, it's even been admitted, but so what if you can't prosecute? Certainly pressure is being brought to bear on AP, otherwise they wouldn't be offering refunds, but they're not going to go further with this than they feel they have to, and that will likely fall short of what needs to be done.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd have to study this and I'm too tired. The best answer I have right now is that the watchdog could grant or with-hold a seal that the site is trusted. That is, free of money-laundering, cheating, RNG can be trusted, etc....

For the group to have any real teeth, it would have to have access to mail every single player registered at the site about findings. It would have to have an investigative arm and would have to be subscribed to by multiple companies, but not necessarily funded in that way.

I'm sure relationships could be created that would be free of any conflicts of interest. Auditing multiple companies does have a checks and balance approach because everyone would have a mechanism to smear competitors and get business from them.

[LuckyMux]

Publish in Bluff? In that case, all your problems are solved.

Bluff pays for both the trip and your time. Totally legitimate expenses for an exclusive article, and you are simply freelancing for them.

This is the biggest story in poker. Your investigations and results are worth continuing, and worth paying for.

Go get 'em, Fletch.

[Paul Levy]

[ QUOTE ]

Alternatively, 3)as I've said 800,000 times, somebody else can proceed with the 'drive AP out of business' campaign. We've already said that's not what we're interested in, so if you think we suck, by all means, take the research we've given you and do it yourselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody thinks you suck, please. Imho there are very valid reasons why an effort should be done so that AP and each and every person that was involved in the decisions over the cover-up are prevented from doing business again in the future.

Such reasons are that online poker is a very sensitive business, as it involves handling vast amounts of money. The handler of a vast amount of money must show an exceptional integrity at all times, without compromising it for any reason whatsoever. I want to reiterate the parallels with the banking/brokerage businesses, and if you don't think they're close enough to poker, think again. A broker gets a fee for matching the opposite interests of two people who have different views over an uncertain event (like the price of a share). How similar that is to playing a poker hand against another person.

Now, the particularly sensitive nature of the banking and brokerage business have long been recognized, and a set of rigid regulations have been (correctly) established around it, and the sanctions for those who offend are heavy and, for the most part, certain. One strike, you're out, and you're out for life. No ifs, no buts. A brokerage or trading company that's rogue to the core (the top management) goes. There's no "we'll clean up our act, let's kiss and make up". Enron's gone, Drexel's gone, and so have others. And very important, the high level of trust and credibility induced by this set of regulations and sanctions allowed the flourishing of the credit and financial markets as we know them.

An online poker room handles money and matches people's views and in addition it's room itself that's responsibile for the realization of the events that money gets exchanged around (poker hands). This makes it twice as sensitive a business, that should be just as regulated as banking, and where the sanctions should be just as severe and uncompromising.

For instance there's a regulation called Sarbanes/Oxley, that was introduced following the Enron scandal. All listed US companies have to comply with it, and what it basically says is that there's no excuse anymore for top manangement to say "I didn't know" about some shady event that took place due to lack of controls. How relevant is that to the case at hand? This should apply to Online poker much more than to almost any other business.

However, online poker takes place in no-man's land, where nobody is accountable to no set of laws and no court of justice. No legit district attorney could prosecute these people even if they wanted. There's no law to abide, so public outrage, lobbying and campaigning are all that a rogue operator has to fear. In this case they worked, but just to some extent.

Therefore, in my view, it is essential that everyone who has an interest in online poker as a credible, sound industry makes his best effort to show that a de-facto set of rules apply to online poker, and that they are the same hard, uncompromising rules that apply to the "real world".

Now I've expressed my views, I hope to see something meaningful from those who disagree, rather than "ZOMG lol conspirtards" and other such juvenile bullshyt.

[ericicecream]

[ QUOTE ]
Yea if money isn't an issue either

a) donate it all to charity
b) give it to people who lost to the cheaters

[/ QUOTE ]

Why?

Is he not allowed to keep some money for himself for all the free time he's put in for the benefit of us all?

[ericicecream]

[ QUOTE ]
A couple of things I forgot to mention...

1. The known cheating accounts are the exclusive domain of the auditors. I cannot access that data. Other than that, I've been told I can see whatever I want.

[/ QUOTE ]

This part sux.

I guess you can report on your impression of what the current situation is like at AP going forward, and I trust your integrity on that, paid or not.