I'm aware of the history of this group, I've spent quite a bit of time reading through the archives here and seen numerous examples of CP and his other gigs doing dodgy things. I'm likewise aware of the thread caruso points to, though it's by no means the most forceful example of that kind of behaviour. I certainly wasn't excusing any of that.
What I was trying to say, is that they haven't yet refused to pay this player. If they do refuse, without a good reason, then I'll be the first to criticise them. But regardless of what's happened before, give them the chance to do the right thing. And yes, it doesn't matter what's gone before, same reason you don't throw someone in jail for a crime just on the grounds that they've committed a similar crime multiple times before. That's what I mean by due process. Condemning them before they've even defaulted on this payment is giving them little incentive to do the right thing. That should be reserved for after the fact. Pre-judging the action before the action takes place makes them damned if they do and damned if they don't. Why would they even bother paying anyone if doing so isn't going to make their reputation any more positive than if they defaulted? If we don't give questionable operations the opportunity to improve, then how can we complain when they don't?
I'm also suspicious that they won't pay up based on their track record, but I'll certainly entertain the possibility that I could be wrong, until proven otherwise. Which is to say I don't take for granted that they won't, and am not going to berate them for not doing until they actually take the choice. We'll see what happens anyway, am sure Venetian will let us know.
