Full Tilt Poker Announcements

[stoneface52]

@sb

Nato sanctions going into IRAQ-not IRAN,going into AFGHANISTAN not PAKISTAN, going into LYBIA not SYRIA, it didnt sanction going into KOSOVO, RWANDA and it does nothing against ISRAEL........ad infinitum.

Our boys might fight side by side with Americans and i'm not some wooly liberal that thinks the fallen heroes have died in vain. I support both sides efforts and the causes but they operate within NATO that picks and chooses its fights, often turning a blind eye to the murder and sufferings of millions!

China might well be providing products to the west and holding together our economies at the same time but the human cost of its global endeavours are overlooked or ignored in a great many cases. Not only the impoverished within its own country that are neglected on a range of human rights issue's but also those countries within Africa and elsewhere where human rights play second fiddle to the prosperity of despots, military junta's and maniacs. All under the banner of the WTO regardless of UN sanctions relative to any particular country i might add.

Which is all beside the point other than you brought the WTO and international law into the mix.

This idea that Full Tilt has just walked away with its tail between its legs because it cant be bothered to fight its case doesn't wash with me. With $100's of millions at stake what sort of organisation that has acted within legal parameters would just say ok, you keep that and we'll go begging cap in hand to try and find the money elsewhere?

Its obvious bob that you have a dim view of the DOJ,etc, and obviously you have good cause but something dont add up to me if you aren't prepared to defend yourself legally when you've done nothing wrong? I also have to wonder why their licence was revoked by an impartial regulatory body if international law was on their side?

Anyway, its obviously a massively emotive subject with so many interests at stake and impartial logic aint hitting the right notes. Que se ra se ra???

Regards stoneface.

[Washerwoman]

My goodness! Where does one start!?

Well, to sum it up, we are all very happy to call on the USA when our lives and "way of living" are in danger (eg, WW2).

We are not sure, however, that we want the encroaching domination of our royal or otherwise domaines (since WW2...Cold War...on to present day Iraq/Afghanistan, by means of unfounded and unsubstantiated targets used by the US media as a support to the US economy and arms dealers) interfering in our internal and micro-economic UK and European affairs.

The whole DOJ/Black Friday event has actually brought home to people what it means to be vulnerable. Once a world economic power realises it can really have its fingers in every pie, we have a problem, Houston!

How do we stop it?! This is a difficult question...how far does it encroach on our "real lives?" and I'm not just talking poker.

Most Western governments will be in the hands of the USA anyway, whether they like to admit it or not.

The internet has not only made international communication and trade easier, but also international domination. Now the arms have changed to the wires. The problem is taking back power of ones own domain...that means creating country-specific sites, more than likely, to bypass the USA and its desire for domination of every aspect of human life, no matter where...remember the Black Friday incident is not the first time the USA has "intended" to monitor and patrol the internet...

In spite of its desire, the USA has not yet managed to control every aspect of Western life.

In order to alter this, we have to become more independent and take back control.

I, personally, have not missed FT or AP, etc, as I've just found another site I'm happy to use.

With government control comes lack of freedom. FT/DOJ/you name it have got your money and you're not going to get it back. If they have access to it and they want it, you are basically powerless to assert any rights. You will be pleading into a grey-suited, deaf vacuum, or someone who lives in the Bahamas and couldn't give a damn.

Time to stop harping on about it, move somewhere smaller, invest less, take out more...

Don't trust anyone

[stoneface52]

@ All

Anyone that has watched braveheart will have noted the tortured cry of FREEDOM rather than submission for an easy death from William Wallace, poetic film licence no doubt but freedom never comes without cost!

The democratic notion of freedoms goes right back to ancient greek philosophy though its foothold in history has always been a tenuous one.

Spartan women had equalities and benefits that were denied to women in British politics as recently as a century ago.

The American democratic constitution denied the rights of blacks right up until as recently as 50 years ago.

Absolute freedom is a philosophical notion of the mind not a practical prospect within human society. The freedoms that those of us enjoy in 'western society' are very much taken for granted and we are often blind to the fact that the powerbokers, the wealthy and officialdoms are our puppeteers! We are nothing more than marionettes and our strings are pulled so we dance to the right tune.

The creation of the internet has tested the boundaries of all governments and the newest nation that is 'cyberspace' has alarmed the greatest powers on the planet in a variety of ways. It just goes to show that no matter how free we think we are we are in fact under some domination in every respect. Whether it is the totalitarian notions of china/n.korea/iran that dont wish the freedoms of speech and communication or the financial notions of america that wish their borders to bring a cost if you cross them, even in cyberspace, we are never as free as we think we are.

America is perhaps the most insular democracy in the world today and they take umbridge at anything and anyone that might injure their prosperity and standing in the world. Their borders are not as open as we might imagine and their freedoms are personal more than being a model for the world.

But, as far as litigation goes they have set the tone for the right to defend one's circumstance and such is underwritten within and through their constitution. American legislation fits within international law without any difficulty and their government or any of its departments have no special rights outside of this.

Case precedence, as in UK law, determines outcomes within legal arguments and the burdon of proof, as in UK law, lies not with the defendent but with the prosecutors. So, i say again, Full Tilt with no case to answer would be entitled to the return of its assets and suitable compensation besides and any other interested or affected parties would share the same prospects.

Those that pine the opinion that the DOJ/American government is too big an institution to take on legally are also wrong because history has proven, especially in America, that multi client cases are regularly pursued. Against tobacco industries, car manufacturers, financial institutions and many more besides.

But, like washerwoman says, i think it is time to move on and some acceptance that Full Tilt has made its own bed is probably the order of the day.

Regards stoneface.

[scrawnybob]

hi

I really am not going to get involved in a wider discussion of freedoms / WW2 / NATO etc because that will end up very divisive and unproductive

however what I dont understand is how on the one hand there are calls for some kind over global / international regulatory body of online poker as if that is a genuinely preferable goal to a free market of regulation

a kind of UNoOP (United Nations of Online Poker) or WPR (World Poker Regulator) to oversea that nobody steps out of line and that all the poker sites are regulated in the same common way

yet not 2 minutes later we're pointing out the fallacies of expecting anyone to obey international trade law and agree to collective international conventions or arrive at consistence or consensus between interested parties, countries or trade blocks

surely acknowledging the current issues with WTO, NATO, UN etc etc clearly points to how unrealistic a global online poker police / single regulator would be

afaiks saying the current global regulators of other things doesnt work without seeing the that a single global poker regulator is an unrealistic aim too even if were desirable (which IMHO its not)

just a thought

cheers SB

ps. I have a feeling that most / many of the cases brought against the US gov't / DOJ on the scale you mention took a hell of a long time to reach a conclusion (even if they won) at great cost along the way

sometimes (rightly or wrongly) business decisions dictate that its better to roll over (as with the bit part seizures along the way pre Black Friday) than to take it on head on even if you are convinced you have a strong case

I am pretty sure that for every case that does go the distance in court there are 10, maybe 100 or more that are equally valid that dont see the light of day because they dont have the resources or the confindence that justice will be done

Bear in mind the DOJ are pushing for a big out of court settlement to keep it out of court on all these cases -

You can easily flip your logic - If the DOJ are really so sure of their case and that the UIGEA is in no danger of being proved uninforcable / illegal and therefore their seizures tenuous then they would be chopping at the bit to deal with the indictments etc asap and not consider any settlements

[stoneface52]

@sb

Good points bob! I actually complain for NATO and the like to do more with greater consistency to be honest. I'm all for a new world order where the rights of the individual are placed before reigious and politcal doctrines. I was merely pointing out the frailties and misgivings within the WTO not complaining of its existence.

In that respect i'm calling for greater powers i suppose but its the big players that always call the shots unfortunately and they regularly won't play ball when it suits them.

Somewhat sarcastically i could refer to international bodies like FIFA or the I.O.C as a template for the online poker community but in the recent past they too have shown themselves to be seriously corrupted. I suppose i have been somewhat idealistic with regard to a world governing body for the poker community but that hardly constitutes poor or hypocritical thinking.

A world governing body with continent (not incontenent) and nation affiliates doesn't seem to be a bad idea to me? Ensuring it is effective and free from devisive behaviour might be at the crux of the issue but the idea is hardly unworkable or indeed nonsensical. Poker is now an international pastime and the best credible regulation would be of most benefit to the punters in my opinion.

As for the legal position with the DOJ i agree with you bob with respect to lengthy and protracted lawsuits. I also agree with you that there is a period whereby there is an expectation that matters will be settled without some final hearing. That is so frequent an occurence within lawsuits that it should be considered as normal practice and just part of the number crunching that goes on behind the issue's.

However, I would argue that the amounts involved are not something that would be written off due to the prospect of protracted litigation. In point of fact if lawyers were so sure of their ground with respect to Full Tilts legal position they would pursue such with alacrity, watering at the mouth with the prospect of compensation.

Whilst i dont dispute most of what you say with regard the intentions of the DOJ my dispute lies with the behaviour of the pokersites. From what information is available to me it appears they have acted inappropriately and extremely unwisely at best and illegally at worst. From that perspective i believe they have shot themselves in the foot and played russian roulette with punters money!

They shouldnt be able to get away with that in my eyes and those that have profitted the most directly from Full Tilt enterprises should be sued themselves if punters dont get their money back.

Regards stoneface.

[Assistanc3]

I would prefer to see a new world order, not just for online poker.

The United States will never abide by anyones rules other then their own, the main reason they argue against anything foreign is because of their constitution. Still to this day they have yet to ratify the Rights of the Child, which the US played a big part in designing, and yet the USA and Somalia are the only countries yet to ratify.

If its not in American interest, government seems to not get involved. Take WW2 for example, the British needed American help more then just supply and it did not happen till Pearl Harbor.

Anyone who believes the North America and the Eurozone is a Free Market is living in fantasy land.
If we lived in a real free market, the car companies and banks would have filled Chapter 11 as per the supply and demand food chain and the marketplace would have filled the void.

Much like what is happening now with poker sites, survival of the fittest, not the richest.

What is online poker? Personally I believe that is what will be lost when you have a country by country rules and regulations. I don't want to play poker with just Canadians, bunch of nits. We enjoy online poker because we get to play with everyone online, thats what the WWW is suppose to be.

I thought we were trying to live in a world with out discrimination, instead world leaders want to tap into their own policy making and segregate online poker. Even the poker players alliance is against online poker, their one and only concern is for Americans, they don't give rats ass about Canada or the UK or any other country.

Our freedom to play online poker with anyone and everyone is just the tip of the iceberg of the bigger issue. World leaders can not agree on even the most basic of civil rights, and instead look for ways to suck more money out peoples pockets.

Whilst i dont dispute most of what you say with regard the intentions of the DOJ my dispute lies with the behaviour of the pokersites. From what information is available to me it appears they have acted inappropriately and extremely unwisely at best and illegally at worst. From that perspective i believe they have shot themselves in the foot and played russian roulette with punters money!

Its not the poker sites fault people don't pay their taxes, and because of that, the governements are going to find away to assure them that the people will have to.

[stoneface52]

@ all

The way to deal with the american issue is surely a simple matter of doing business, brokering agreements and ratifying the rules of play?

If there are international obligations at the heart of the matter (i'm not sure this is actually the case because some countries in the world ban gambling of any kind,Thailand to name but one) wheeling and dealing is the order of the day. Given that the Americans view off shore online poker as a means of tax avoidance and a threat to their internal poker revenue's striking an accord in business terms seems a simple solution.

The benefits of residing in countries where there aren't such issue's is almost irrelevant and paying a levy to america or american customers paying a tax to their online contributions is a mere matter of business. I dont presume to know how that might work but i am presuming that any internal arrangements for online poker that already exist would in some way be relevant to overseas companies wishing to trade within american borders?

@sb

Have there been any further announcements, you said there were expected to be three? Further announcements might allay any further supposition and conjecture?

Regards stoneface.

[scrawnybob]

hi

they said to expect three announcements however

it's difficult to tell with Full Tilt, some are suggesting that the three issues that Jeff Ifrah said would be coming over last week have been addressed in the one announcement

if that is the case the level of detail to address all three things mentioned then its a pretty poor show and not worth the wait

if the first one just hinted at the other issues to be talked about in the 2 following announcements then we might get a bit more flesh on the whole situation - lets hope so

also we were told they would be over last week but I am guessing that they are thinking now over a 7 day period from the first announcement

who knows to be fair ;-(

cheers scrawnybob

[Poker Orifice]

Things appear to be looking worse..... & worse... & worse for FTP
Losing hope here now & really don't expect to see FTP online ever again. This week the sports channel here (Canada) finally stopped showing PokerAfterDark (TSN).

Lawyers reppin' the FTP co's. have quit reppin' them from what I've read. (maybe fear of not gettin' paid? lol... if there's no money... there's no money)

Seems like such a HUGE shame as (imo) FTP was the best online poker site going for many reasons (management of finances not being one of them obviously). A billion dollar business run down the shitter... what a waste .. sigh

[stoneface52]

I dont know what the reasons are for thinking that FTP was the best online pokersite but I have to say thats some judgement? Feck the punters money and whatever ethics have gone on behind the scenes, the tables sure look pretty???

What else might have gone on behind the scenes that prevents FT defending there interests i wonder? What role have team full tilt played in the disaster? Is the lack of communication and legal defence purely a matter of money or is it down to fears of further exposure?

$500 million is one estimated figure held or unaccounted for and if i'm perfectly honest i'm getting a bit pissed off with the selfish and dumb attitudes of those springing to the defence of poker sites, especially full tilt, that have proven themselves to be less than credible and from my perspective down right disreputable!

The final acts are yet to be played out and i guess the individual nature of poker playing leads to self interest and a lack of collective appreciation but i for one am not about to defend the indefensible. This thread eminated from my first post on here and far too much by way of response takes no account of the terrible business ethics that underpin the fiasco.

Its a dog eat dog industry and the single driving motivation is money and profit. Some of you appear to think that such a determination is all par for the course and where poker and gambling combine there is no room for ethics or fair play.

Well im rapidly falling out with the game and the notion that nobody gives a shit about your average punter is helping me get there and if full tilt does go to the wall, not only will it have got its just deserts but it might also make others think twice before operating without any moral, ethical or legal considerations!

Those prepared to defend such with nothing more than their own personal interests and reflections in mind should take a long hard look at themselves and remember such attitudes the next time they feel like somebody or life has fucked them over!

Enraged, stoneface!