Mathematical Proof that English Harbour is cheating

[spearmaster]

They loaded bad code on that day. There was a bunch of other new code relating to tournaments that was loaded up at the same time.

As for controls, I have no idea how strict their controls were before this happened, I'd assume there were reasonable controls in place but sometimes one slips by and ... well, you know...

I have been assured that their controls have been dramatically tightened up - and I hope to hell they meant what they said because this mistake WAS preventable and I sure as hell don't want to see them slip up again.

And frankly - if it does happen again they will have absolutely no defense, I don't personally believe in a three-strikes rule. I personally spewed a lot of venom at them in the first call I had with them and, to their credit, they accepted this and did not try to defend their actions.

[soflat]

I have been assured that their controls have been dramatically tightened up - and I hope to hell they meant what they said because this mistake WAS preventable and I sure as hell don't want to see them slip up again.

And frankly - if it does happen again they will have absolutely no defense, I don't personally believe in a three-strikes rule. I personally spewed a lot of venom at them in the first call I had with them and, to their credit, they accepted this and did not try to defend their actions.

Yes, I too hope it doesn't happen again.

I also hope it never happened before this incident.

[HKGambler]

Jetset, please don’t amplify your sentiment whenever you have a chance, rightly or wrongly. Honestly I’m bored of reading your posts 30% of which are nothing more than patting on Spearmaster’s & Casinomeister’s back. That’s already too much! Don’t you know how sickening that may be? Don’t you realize the readers may be goose-pimpled? Next, if your posts can have shorter phrases, more simplified wordings & less convoluted argumentation, it’ll be much appreciated.

Ted & Bryan had been on the arena for 6-8 years. Their reputation is built up, through time, through ups & downs, to arrive at the status today. Others have their own evaluation from time to time that may differ. Readers don’ t need to be constantly reminded how credible they are and basically peoples’ eyes are clear. In other words, we are not blind followers.

Jetset, do you have an analysis of your own how the criticisms came the way they were. I admit some of them are personal insults; however, most are logical and conceivable. More importantly, they are the victims’ voice. (cheated out of their money) BTW- What’s your explanation on the series of coincidence? How would you comment on that 5.5 SD to the left that made people pondered? I haven’t heard your insights so far. Offer your objectivity (facts & figures) so that the whole discussions will become much more sensible than now.

To a lot of players the truth isn’t out yet. If you look at the other side of a coin, then you’ll be happy why they have not taken the defensive views too easily.

[Macgyver]

Great, I spend over an hour doing this just to see someone personally attack jetset now. Some of you people are too much at times ...

Here's my culmination of going through 50+ pages of posts (similar to pinababy69) and I personally agree with jetset's post that people's childish and immature attacks on spearmaster can only inevitably lead to people like him just refusing to get involved any more.

However, it is good to see that other posters have voiced their appreciation of the lengths spearmaster has gone.

Without further ado (and a helluva long post):

People do sometimes make errors in coding. But that being said, they're going to have to climb a very tall mountain to make that one stick in this case.

That was a pretty poor explanation from EH management. These "theoretically deterministic varying chances" just don't add up... pun fully intended.

I guess in the event that the software was at one time fair, you will be able to identify when it stopped being fair by analysing data from each day (and depending on the amount of data that you actually have), as although it is clear that the software was behaving unfairly for a period on and before April 30 2006, it was not necessarily unfair on say January 1: otherwise it might have been noticed then. I think it reasonable to assume that this has been going on for a few weeks but not necessarily months.

I have also identified one possible scenario where a bug could accidentally have entered the system, and I am awaiting the results of a further analysis, or better yet, an explanation from the software provider, preferably here in the forums.

However, this is the only possible scenario where I personally would believe that an unintentional error occurred. Because of this, I have not identified this scenario to the provider nor will I identify it here for the time being. Once I hear an explanation from the provider, I will say more about what I think.

The denial came before they actually looked at logs - and I fully agree that the initial statement was premature and damaging and really was done without proper examination of the issue at hand.

Kengam - I'm not confident of anything at this stage - the only difference between me and everyone else at this point in time (other than being a moderator, of course) is the scenario I have referred to above. I have no vested interest in EH, as I do not market or affiliate with them (or anyone else at this time, though of course there are a few unused links on Awesome Jackpots.com LOL). In fact, my primary and voluntary mission at this time is to protect players from being ripped off or otherwise unfairly treated by rogue casino operations.

But I cannot do this at the expense of harming an operation unnecessarily or unfairly - there must be some sort of balance somewhere. So, while we are fresh from the battles... LOL... I think it's only fair to give EH a bit more time to explain exactly what happened, if at all.

If no explanation is forthcoming in a reasonable amount of time I will naturally be forced to assume that there is something to hide, at which point no further guarantees or warranties are made.

I think the final analysis will be made by everyone here once OddsOn comes forth with an explanation of what happened. I would dare to venture that my analysis will turn out to be the same as everyone else unless, and only if, the one scenario I have possibly envisioned ultimately turns out to be what happened (and this is no more likely or unlikely than any other scenario).

Sorry, you are wrong. At one time they allowed all video poker games. Then they banned multiline video poker (last year). Then they banned Jacks or Better (before the rigged doubling starting). There is no correlation between them no longer offering Jacks or Better and the rigged video poker doubling.

Them no longer allowing Jacks or Better just meant that you could play a different video poker game, probably Tens or Better. I guess they stopped offering it for the obvious reason that Jacks or Better is less profitable.

It doesn't change the fact that they issued a false statement about their game being fair, even though the software had just been changed back from rigged to fair. That is the most damning thing, not to mention that it's pretty hard to see how this could have happened in the first place.

Ergopro, as far as I know this is for EH only.

Zoozie - we all agreed that this statement was not only premature, but incorrect...

I think we are best off ignoring the first post which was clearly made in haste and poor judgement. The second post, plus the post by the Wizard, are more indicative of the situation and the resolution.

We are of course still waiting for a technical explanation, but it is the weekend, so let's see if something is forthcoming in the next day or two. And worse comes to worst, I and Meister are expecting to be meeting with EH senior management in Montreal the following week to try and get to the bottom of this issue.

Please rest assured that we have everyone's best interests in mind. And thank you for not trying to draw any more conclusions for the time being as they will not serve any real purpose nor will they affect the resolution that EH has proposed. One way or another there will be an answer for all this.

As you have seen, further posts have indicated that there was indeed something wrong with the game, so that should put any doubts about that to rest.

Now you should know that the moderators here MUST necessarily give equal treatment to all parties (except spammers) and thus I was not, and still not, willing to conclude "cheat" as was done in the instance referred to above.

Non-random - yes. Unfair game - yes. Cheating - not yet.

thelawnet - The only reason I ask that the first post be ignored is because I am quite certain it was made in haste without fully ascertaining the severity of the situation, and also before examination of the logs. Had they made such a post after looking at the logs there is no doubt in my mind that they would have been rogued instantly.

Everyone makes boo-boos sometimes. Sadly, though, this was a big boo-boo. And they also came clean shortly afterwards, apologized for their errors, and made what I believe was a reasonable compensation offer - again, thanks to your efforts. Oh - and BTW, at no time have any of us recommended that you play... LOL... I sure as heck wouldn't be playing right now and naturally I can't expect any of you wanting to play either...

Now I, and I'm sure Meister as well, want to concentrate on finding out exactly what happened without having to delve through all sorts of allegations, slime, arguments, whatever - obviously having to monitor this thread with the great level of activity doesn't make it any easier and takes away from our time doing other things that need doing.

There is only one piece of information missing (that I can think of) and this is what we're trying to obtain. Everything else said in here will have no bearing on the outcome of the investigation until this last piece of information is obtained, if at all.

Again I reiterate, we have everyone's best interests at heart - so please be patient and give us a little breathing room so we can put an end to this once and for all.

So yes, I basically believe that your 4 postulates are correct. It does not take long for a bug to be fixed if you are the coder - and of course it does not take long for you to change code back to what it was if you were the coder. Time is not an issue in modifying small pieces of code, though discovering the problem may take a bit more time if it was not deliberate.
Quote:
Sure if you think all that's plausible, but to me given the circumstances, I don't think that it makes sense to take what they say at face value. There is prima facie evidence of cheating, and that should be enough to make any statement coming from them suspicious at best.

Prima facie evidence of a non-random game, if you don't mind. But I certainly wouldn't blame you or anyone else if you were suspicious of the statements... I was sure as hell suspicious of that first statement myself...
Quote:
And we still haven't heard why this 'bug' didn't seem to affect Hot Pepper and Fire and Ice casinos.

We'll try to get to the bottom of that. But as you know, EH is the main client of Odds On, and sometimes they get stuff in advance. And sometimes they get stuff that other operators don't get.

None of the other software manufacturers are any different - nothing is instantly deployed at all operations at the same time precisely because they must be sure there are not any unusual problems - and even then problems do slip by - again, at any software manufacturer. I've personally spotted and reported problems with MGS software way back in 2000 and 2001 - mind you, they were rules-based problems (place bets not off by default on come-out roll, aces not being counted as high card in pai gow poker) - and to be honest these were just small slip-ups or different interpretations of the rules. Even MGS autoplay didn't always use correct strategy for their games.

Shit happens. Just let us figure out what the hell went wrong in this particular case - I must say I'm not all that hopeful but again, as a moderator, and for that matter as a middleman, it is incumbent on me to give every side a fair hearing.

I am waiting for a technical explanation of what happened, plain and simple. If it is not forthcoming soon, there won't be much doubt in my mind as to what happened. But keep in mind that they were honest enough to give you the logs and to admit the problem even if they did muck up that first statement.

I sure hope that it doesn't turn out that the fix was deliberate... there is absolutely no need for this in the industry, and I sure as hell won't support it.

Anyhow, let's see what pans out. All I can do is try my best... as I'm sure others like Meister and Jetset will continue to do.

Slow down, guys...

What I have is the buggy version which was introduced. It's a bit more complicated than I expected but I can also see what may have happened - the only thing really is to determine whether everything adds up or not. But I'll need a little time - I've just arrived in LA and obviously jetlagged... and those damn in-seat power systems didn't like my computer so I couldn't power up during the flight either.

I have obtained this code obviously on a confidential basis - but I am urging them to release at least one more copy to someone else experienced in debugging code since I would feel more comfortable having someone else to corroborate my findings (or correcting my mistakes LOL).

For all intents and purposes, in this case I would meet your description. And yes I would like at least one other. But I think an entire committee would be a bit hard for them to swallow... and I listened to two phone calls with detailed descriptions probably totalling about 90 minutes, with lots of questions interspersed. The explanation, in my case, was not sufficient without the code because it was "slightly" incredible because the error is too, for lack of a better term, "idiotic" - and entirely the type of error I make in my own programming as well. You know, like bonehead coding errors... the ones which make you slap your head when you discover them...

I understand that something is forthcoming shortly from another person. My brain is still in scrambled egg mode so forgive me for being a bit on the slow side - but it makes no sense for me to release any findings on my part until I understand exactly what happened - and though the picture I am seeing appears to be quite clear, I need to ensure that everything adds up, naturally. So now I accept part of the blame for being a bit slow...

Answer to 1) - They appear to have been testing code for a new bonus game that would make the doubling a bit more exciting - this code was not supposed to have been released or live, but they forgot to comment out these lines and subsequently the routines went live while still incomplete and thus threw errors which were also not properly trapped.

2) and 3) - this is exactly what I am looking for, whether or not this was plausible - and this is also what is taking me a bit of time to uncover.

Hypotheses - 1) possible but far from definite. 2) I'm not testing for the past, and as no evidence has been put forward it would be a waste of time - though I can certainly understand why some people are concerned about the past.

One more thing I should point out - this does not appear to be a Houdini - it appears more likely to be the work of a sloppy programmer (like me, for example) plus very poor control over software handling and updating procedures. Despite all the noise you are hearing from other quarters, I have no interest in misleading anyone, and have no vested interest in a result either way. I do, however, want everyone to know, once and for all, whether this was an unintended bug, or whether EH intended to cheat players in which case I will personally go out of my way to ensure that justice is done.

There appears to have been something which did in fact change the result of the draw - not deliberately, but through the incompleteness and sloppiness described above. And the change was not necessarily bad - and in fact not necessarily predictable, because the result of the change could still result in a win.

I will be elaborating on this once I have finished studying what I need to. One might say that I need to be able to "tell the story" in such a way that it is easy for everyone to understand. And I have to be sure that the story "told" to me by the code matches up with the "story" told by the data - otherwise I will determine that the code is not what was in place at the time the problem occurred.

So again I ask for a little patience. The truth must, and will, come out.

And here we go with the personal attacks ...

why have we not had a statement from English Harbour? Spear, I am going to be frank here and I hope I don't insult you. You are using terms such as "comedy of errors" and sloppy programming. I am not sure you are capable of interpreting this code. It shouldn't be so complex that it causes you to be "fuzzy" and hard to think clearly. I do not feel comfortable with the interpreting of this code in your hands. Let it be analyzed by someone more familiar with gaming code or no one at all. I know that is probably out of the question but I thought it needed to be said.

You say there was no evidence of past cheating to be concerned with the numbers of years past. Alrighty then. Sure, I understand, they couldn't be so corrupt as to have cheated in the past now could they? You are giving them WAY too much benefit of the doubt and I am afraid you are going more than overboard to protect their name. A cheat was exposed. EH denied it. You are analyzing code that EH sent you. If they were cheating with this code would they have sent you it? I am interested in past numbers. I am interested if the Wiz ever audited this specific double up game in the past. Nothing I have read has told me that he has. He also has not repsonded to this question.

I am sorry Spear, but I think you are way out of your league in trying to interpret this code and you are taking chances on your evaluation. You are also taking chances on your integrity as you are WAY too quick to defend this outfit who was caught cheating.

I think that's got to be an individual choice. When all the facts are laid out on the table, everyone must decide for themselves what to do with these facts. My own personal objective is to get the facts out. I cannot tell people to support EH, or boycott EH, I can only try to get as many facts as they can and hopefully present them in an objective, unbiased manner, at least from my point of view (since I have to interpret code and intent).

The problem this time is that you feel too much sympathy for EH. Perhaps because you don’t gamble yourself; or you had frequent communications & long relationship with the industry guys, and basically your income is built on the survival of the industry overall. No offense here you know. Therefore you are bound to be more in their shoes than the players are.

My advice: You should concentrate on your analysis of their source code. But then it is hard to convince the players anyhow for such a bug to have accidentally incurred. Stop speaking for EH for it isn’t worth the case.

So I read on the other forum that English Harbour has stated that a incomplete bonus round was causing the bug in the double up game. That is total horse crap. Are you going to tell us that you buy this excuse Spearmaster? I would like to hear a word or two from Bryan about this.

As far as I am concerned, Odds On, English Harbour, and any webmaster who advertises for them should be blacklisted. Anyone else who defends them has already lost trust and integrity in other forum circles. I am disappointed in The Wiz for falling into their trap and protecting his auditing bisiness which must be pretty lucrative. This whole affair smells bad. Everyone involved in it that weren't cheated themselves should be ashamed.

I have my own facts. My mind was made up long before April. Spearmaster you keep telling us that you have the code and it looks like the error is not one of malice. You have yet to give us your analysis of this code. You have only agreed with The Wiz's assessment as if you were waiting for it before you could give your own. I do not find you to be a qualifying person to analyze this code. You keep telling us that you are awaiting other information. You said earlier in this thread that you have a hunch of what the problem might have been. This was before you even had the code. Can you enlighten us as to what this hunch was?

If the game was broken in April that should be reason enough to audit this game over the past few years. I could provide you with my logs, but surely they would dispute their validity. I cannot provide you with the numbers from other players for reasons stated earlier. The only way for them to prove that this was a two week mistake is to release their numbers from the past 3 years. If they truly believed the game has always been fair then releasing these numbers would be a good thing for them.

It is not too early to pass judgement on Odds On and English Harbour. We have enough evidence that they were cheating in April. You do not get a second chance in this biz. I am sorry to hear that you are going to side with the casino on this bogus excuse. You have always been one of the good guys in the industry. This certainly changes things

All I can say is that - outside of the internet casino industry - "conflict of interest" rules would generally prevent someone from offering advice or analysis if they had a financial interest in the case at hand.

I realize the internet gambling doesn't work under the same rules as other industries. That's why sites like CasinoMeister are so important.

In the short run, sweeping something like this under the rug may seem like the best thing for internet gambling. But the industry is asking players to deposit money on faith - faith that they'll be paid if they win, faith that their deposits won't be stolen, and faith that the games are fair. In the long run, anything that undermines that faith is bad for everyone - not only for the players (who can, after all, always go to land-based casinos and get free drinks along with fair games) but for the casinos and their affiliates as well.

There will always be casinos that cheat their players. That's just human nature - especially in the gambling industry, where the risks are so small, and the rewards are (potentially) so great.

What players are looking for - hoping for - is that there is someone with influence in the industry who is both willing and able to put the long-term interests of everyone over the short-term interests of the casinos.

If you believe players want to think they've been cheated (maybe I've misunderstood you), you have no business representing players anywhere, to anyone, and especially not at an internet gambling conference.

Linus - I have already established that there is no conflict of interest many times over and I do not wish to do it again. There will not be sweeping anything under the rug - I am going to expose everything that happened in as open a fashion as I can, with detailed explanations and hopefully, if I have the time, with graphic diagrams which show how this could happen.

IMO Spear made up his mind on EH's innocence long before he examined this code. His posts throughout this thread clearly indicate this. Because of this I do not think of him as an impartial mediator. When one makes up his mind before he examines the facts then it is very likely that his hypothesis will be based on his original thoughts. That is human nature.

Kengam - I answer questions as they come. I report things as I see them - and I have not yet declared anyone innocent of anything. The alternative would have been to say nothing all this time - then how much would you believe any subsequent statement?

What you see in here is what I believe I am seeing - buggy code. That in itself does not absolve anyone of anything. Furthermore, I am not a mediator - I am an independent third party making a report on what I see. I am not judge or jury - you guys are.

I wonder if English Harbour is feverously working on the new so called double up game as it will be expected now that they are using that as a coverup for the cheating bug.

I wonder if they threw that program together in the couple of days they had so they could easily convince Spear that the missing subroutine was a work in progress. It seems to have worked. I do not believe a word of it.

NEE NAW

BAD ANSWER

They lose.

No offence, and I appreciate Spearmater's contribution but in the first place spearmaster is biased from the very beginning.

Spearmaster, we can do a poll here, if more people think that you are biased, you have to rethink about your position.

If this post annoy you, please ban me. I am fine with it.

Wow spear? Please be joking. "Deserve credit", "stepped up to the plate". How about a few more undeserved cliches to describe EH's actions. They are nowhere near having done anything for which they should deserve any credit. They have done the bare minimum that they could possibly do, and now theyre waiting and feeling out the situation to figure out how much more is necessary to make the public forget this incident and bring in a new wave of clients.
Be careful spear, im starting to agree that you are definitely backing the casino much more then they deserve. If you wanna play devils advocate then fine, but if you actually believe some of these things then....

You are far much emotional. I don't see all the players having the same comments towards you.

Are you speaking for the players or speaking on behalf of the casino now?

How about 'dem apples? :thumb:

[ftg]

You are just too funny. How my wordings causes personal attacks?

[ftg]

My point of views remain the same, no matter EH cheats or not:

1. Spearmaster is putting himself too much in defending EH. He should have chosen to be more silent and just have the report write-up first.

2. Not only the players, but also Spearmaster is very emotional sometimes.

3. He acted like a spokesman of EH though he is not. When some players asks for more log data, he's the first to reject the request, even without discussion with EH first. That's very normal EH remains silent because someone is unofficially speaking for them.

4. Why my poll is suspended? Really no need.

5. We need to have independent thinking, but not only agree to authority and reputable people. That said, it's not saying Spearmaster is lying/bought. In fact, I believe he has his belief but I just can't agree with some of them. Some of you surely disagree with me, but this is not insulting me at all.

6. (this is new one) Byran (me after reading his comment), is offering a more balanced view. He is not forcing any people to believe him. But he did offer very sound arguments though I do not 100% agree.

BTW, i remember gamemaster also propose a zero tolerence. Gamemaster is also very reputable too, isn't he?

[kengam]

EH is not responding here because they believe my independent analysis will be better than them coming in here to point out what I am trying to point out when all of you will simply not believe them any more than you are believing me at present.




Should have known? Of course I knew - and you think I'm stupid to carry on? I'm not stupid - I'm tired. And I WILL finish this when I am good and ready - in the meantime keep your condescending remarks to yourself.

So are you speaking for English Harbour or are you just guessing their reasons for not coming forward? I WILL NOT keep my remarks to myself. This is a forum where remarks and discussions take place. Just who in the Hell do you think you are? I have lost well over 40k playing a double up game that was supposed to be fair. YES I AM ANGRY. I am sorry that your precious feelings are hurt. I am out 40 grand. You have your greater than thou attitude towards anyone that disagrees with you. I guess you will have to learn to take criticism instead of crying. I had taken my losses and moved on until this thread developed. You too must take criticism and not be a little girl about it.

You may have seen the code and spoken to those in charge, but I have played the game. Many, many times over the past three years. Don't act high and mighty around me. It is absolutely inexcusable how this has happened and there is no doubt in my mind that it had happened before.

[thelawnet]

And here we go with the personal attacks ...

NEE NAW

BAD ANSWER

They lose.

Could you please explain how that is a personal attack? I said THEY LOSE, in respect of their statement, reported by Spearmaster, that the results would look normal if you went back to January 1st, a statement that is indeed incorrect.

That was clearly not a personal on Spearmaster, nor anybody else, only of English Harbour. Spearmaster is quite obviously only one person, and not therefore a 'THEY'.

Jesus.

I spent a lot of my time analysing this and pointing out that the errors in what English Harbour have said, not to mention exposing this in the first place and getting tens of thousands of pounds refunded to the players affected.

I would appreciate it if you would not shit on me for something I have not done.

Thanks.

[Pinababy69]

My point of views remain the same, no matter EH cheats or not:

1. Spearmaster is putting himself too much in defending EH. He should have chosen to be more silent and just have the report write-up first.

And if he'd been quiet, you all would have condemned him for that as well, and screamed cover-up. That he was buying time to come up with a plausible explanation.

2. Not only the players, but also Spearmaster is very emotional sometimes.

I'd be emotional too if I had to read people questioning my integrity and attacking my reputation over and over. People who haven't spent 6 or more years working in this industry and building that reputation. People who sit back and read forums and think they know it all.

3. He acted like a spokesman of EH though he is not. When some players asks for more log data, he's the first to reject the request, even without discussion with EH first. That's very normal EH remains silent because someone is unofficially speaking for them.

I don't see where he ever acted as a spokesman for the casino (see my previous post). That being said, I do agree that EH should have gotten in here and at least made a statement on their own. Although I can only imagine what kind of free-for-all that would have turned into.

4. Why my poll is suspended? Really no need.

What purpose did it serve? I think everyone pretty much agrees that there is very little trust between EH and the players, and most people have already stated they wouldn't play there anymore, myself included. I also believe that you were told you could start a poll once this was concluded ie. final report posted. I can search that if you'd like.

5. We need to have independent thinking, but not only agree to authority and reputable people. That said, it's not saying Spearmaster is lying/bought. In fact, I believe he has his belief but I just can't agree with some of them. Some of you surely disagree with me, but this is not insulting me at all.

I'll say it again, Spearmaster is independent. He does not work for the casino, he does not get paid by the casino, he does not earn revenue from the casino. Exactly what third party (who's qualified) would you suggest take over this monumental task? Maybe one of the lynch mob who've been posting in this thread? You know, one of the unbiased ones (pure sarcasm there in case you missed it).

6. (this is new one) Byran (me after reading his comment), is offering a more balanced view. He is not forcing any people to believe him. But he did offer very sound arguments though I do not 100% agree.

BTW, i remember gamemaster also propose a zero tolerence. Gamemaster is also very reputable too, isn't he?

Spearmaster wasn't forcing anyone to believe him either.

Don't know Gamemaster, so I can't comment. Who is he? No insult intended, I really don't know.

[spearmaster]

So are you speaking for English Harbour or are you just guessing their reasons for not coming forward? I WILL NOT keep my remarks to myself. This is a forum where remarks and discussions take place. Just who in the Hell do you think you are? I have lost well over 40k playing a double up game that was supposed to be fair. YES I AM ANGRY. I am sorry that your precious feelings are hurt. I am out 40 grand. You have your greater than thou attitude towards anyone that disagrees with you. I guess you will have to learn to take criticism instead of crying. I had taken my losses and moved on until this thread developed. You too must take criticism and not be a little girl about it.

You may have seen the code and spoken to those in charge, but I have played the game. Many, many times over the past three years. Don't act high and mighty around me. It is absolutely inexcusable how this has happened and there is no doubt in my mind that it had happened before.

I put in 100K over the past five years and broke about even.

Put up or shut up. End of story. And look who's crying now?

This is just too funny... I still miss arguing with you - but you know damn well I require data before I can investigate anything. You have no logs, no data, not one iota of evidence - how in the world do you expect anyone to believe you?

I apologize. I still like arguing with you - but the least you can do is play by the rules.