Who is this muppet?

[lots0]

If you have market power simply do not deliver players.

The knowledgeable, honest and reputable affiliates have already dropped or even Rogued Absolute and Ultimate Bet.

However you still have places like gambling911, CAP and some others that get a good volume of traffic that still support, refer players and affiliates to Absolute and Ultimate.

This is one of those times where the dirty underbelly of the online gambling is visible to outsiders. It is more than obvious to anyone looking at this issue that sites like gambling911 that push themselves as a player advocate and News outlet and sites like CAP that promote themselves as as an affiliate advocate are in fact just shills for the gambling sites, acquiring players and affiliates for them. A very nasty business indeed.

 

[Simmo!]

Was the system compromised at UltimateBet too?

I disagree that a good affiliate will stop promoting bad casinos. An ethical affiliate might, but my opinion of a "good" affiliate is one who continues the coverage but with information on the misdemeanours. I did that with Jackpot Factory last year and I stand by that decision. I'm doing it with Absolute now (

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

).

IMO it's waaay better for the punter to see all the facts before making their own decision. If they read of problems, and still want to click through then that's their decision. Education is important in this industry.

 

[GaryWatson]

The knowledgeable, honest and reputable affiliates have already dropped or even Rogued Absolute and Ultimate Bet.

However you still have places like gambling911, CAP and some others that get a good volume of traffic that still support, refer players and affiliates to Absolute and Ultimate.

This is one of those times where the dirty underbelly of the online gambling is visible to outsiders. It is more than obvious to anyone looking at this issue that sites like gambling911 that push themselves as a player advocate and News outlet and sites like CAP that promote themselves as as an affiliate advocate are in fact just shills for the gambling sites, acquiring players and affiliates for them. A very nasty business indeed.

Ching! Ching! Happy new year Lots0, now I know you are genuine. I respect the players I bring in, weather its personal or through search engines. I was getting shafted long before the cheating scandal came out. I stuck by AP & UB because I liked the sites. My error.

 

[lots0]

Ching! Ching! Happy new year Lots0, now I know you are genuine.

I guess that is a good thing.

Was the system compromised at UltimateBet too?

No one knows. As both sites are owned and operated by the same people, it would be rather simple minded to think that only one of the sites was cheating. So did they have a 'good' poker room that did not cheat players and they had a separate 'bad' poker room that did cheat the players. Come on that is really way beyond belief.

@ Simmo, it is good you at least have a small print disclaimer at the top of the page. But your disclaimer is rather vague and talks about 'being investigated for unusual account activity' and "no official conclusions have been made"...

Come on Simmo, Absolute Poker was CAUGHT red handed cheating and even admitted it themselves in press releases. Your education of the public should at the very least be complete and honest.

I don't know if you remember or not, but I was the one of the very few voices in support of Absolute Poker in the beginning of this whole thing. I sure took a lot of shit over it too, but now I have been convinced by overwhelming evidence and especially by their own confession of guilt that Absolute Poker is dirty as dirt.

 

[Rusty]

IMO it's waaay better for the punter to see all the facts before making their own decision. If they read of problems, and still want to click through then that's their decision. Education is important in this industry.

While I agree with that statement Simmo and the sentiment is admirable it relies on the information being presented in the right manner.

For example if you wish to educate a player that a site may have been caught cheating then the information should probably be displayed as a warning (IN RED) or at least as a caution rather than a note.
Also it would be better to inform the player of the possible implications of using such a site.
Of course this being the case it may be better to just distance yourself from such operations.

I hope you see this as constructive criticism.

 

[Simmo!]

... I have been convinced by overwhelming evidence and especially by their own confession of guilt that Absolute Poker is dirty as dirt.

I'm tempted to leave the AP thing to one side as it's being dealt with in another thread but there are two points I want to make: firstly, there is an argument that once something like this is uncovered, the chances are it will become the most secure place to play as they couldn't afford it to happen twice. Secondly, as I understand it (and I haven't read every single post), the indiscretion was not deliberate cheating by the operator, but rather the system was compromised by an employee...is that right? Regardless, whichever explanation one chooses to believe, the fact is there will be different opinions. My point is, while I have my own opinions, people could see that in different ways so it's best to present purely the facts and leave them to decide.

No one knows. As both sites are owned and operated by the same people, it would be rather simple minded to think that only one of the sites was cheating. So did they have a 'good' poker room that did not cheat players and they had a separate 'bad' poker room that did cheat the players. Come on that is really way beyond belief.

On the assumption I'm correct above, and that both poker rooms use the same software and system, then yes, UltimateBet could presumably be compromised in the same way. But was it?

While I agree with that statement Simmo and the sentiment is admirable it relies on the information being presented in the right manner.

For example if you wish to educate a player that a site may have been caught cheating then the information should probably be displayed as a warning (IN RED) or at least as a caution rather than a note.

Yes in retrospect using the word "Caution" would be better and I'll change it. I think the text and the explanation is pretty obvious, and it's the first thing you read, but I assume the player is intelligent enough to make their own decisions.

Incidentally, it's not admirable sentiment really - it's in my best interests to make sure that a player knows what's what when I still have him/her as an audience...I'd be shooting myself in the foot to send someone somewhere that might piss them off and make them leave.

 

[lots0]

Simmo, I reread my last post and I want to apologize, it reads like I was attacking you, that was not my intent, sorry.

the chances are it will become the most secure place to play as they couldn't afford it to happen twice.

Sorry I don't buy that argument. Using that logic, they never should have cheated in the first place... Because they really couldn't afford for it to happen once, now could they?

the indiscretion was not deliberate cheating by the operator, but rather the system was compromised by an employee...

It was deliberate cheating by the operator. Tom Scott was not just an employee, he was the owner/manager of Absolute Poker at the time and he was the main person behind the cheating.

Simmo, this whole Absolute Poker thing is dirty to the core, even if your putting up an disclaimer, your still a business partner with them as long as you are recruiting for them and I hate to say it, but it makes you look like your only concern is the cash.

 

[Simmo!]

Simmo, this whole Absolute Poker thing is dirty to the core, even if your putting up an disclaimer, your still a business partner with them as long as you are recruiting for them and I hate to say it, but it makes you look like your only concern is the cash.

Having never referred a single player to AP or UB, money isn't the issue here - wouldn't make the slightest difference to my bottom line if I leave them up or take them down - there's plenty of other poker rooms I can use. However...

...look at it this way. If I were to take them down, ignore them altogether: a player comes along, does/doesn't choose a poker room for now, goes somewhere else later, sees Absolute on another site, forum or via Google and signs up. At least having been over my way he/she'll know the issues....were I to just remove them, he/she'd probably have had no idea.

Swings and roundabouts...apples and pears I guess, but I prefer to have a site that is objective and allows players to decide for themselves whether it's a place they should play. They have all the info they need...good and bad.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that I think AP are "clean". It's actually not dissimilar to the current US prohibition argument in many respects. Do you stop people playing because you think it's wrong, or do you give them factual information to make up their own minds?

PS. Added "Caution" and updated the text. Thanks for the suggestion

 

[lots0]

Hmmm, I do understand your logic, but I disagree with it.

You don't have to remove information about AP, as a matter of fact I am all for everyone providing more information to players about the Absolute Poker cheating scandal.

I for one did not remove Absolute Poker, I moved them to a Rogue status and removed my affiliate links and any direct link to AP from all of my sites.

The information stays up, the players get information and can make their own decisions. If the players still want to play at Absolute Poker after being told about the cheating (although it is beyond me why would anyone want to play where they know the house cheats), they can sign up through another affiliate site or directly with AP, but players are not going to sign up for Absolute Poker through me or mine.

 

[Simmo!]

That's fair enough. I tend to steer away from labelling myself but I see your point too At the end of the day the player gets the full picture, which is the most important thing.

 

[lots0]

The labeling thing is a bit touchy and it is very subjective, maybe fuel for another thread...

But I really think labeling (calling a bad casino a Rogue or putting them on a websites Blacklist) works very well to let punters know that they are taking extra chances with their money when they deposit in one of these casinos or poker rooms.

 

[GaryWatson]

Kudos to casinomeister. Its the only site ive found with the right balance. We will never agree on everything but I think it is the most unbiased site of its kind

 

[jetset]

Are we not really debating here the difference between (objective as possible) "news" and active "promotion?"

If it's the former, then I would lean in Simmo's direction, where imo it's better to present as many of the facts as are available as an important guide for the decision players make themselves whether to frequent a venue or not.

I don't believe you can condemn an information site for presenting a balanced picture of a newsworthy matter, scandalous or not. And simply refusing to report or flag the issue is akin to pretending it's not there.

On the other hand, where an information site continues to actively promote and send players to a site where the promoting webmaster must have a reasonable inkling of bad conduct, a lack of player safety or unfair play....that I would regard as questionable in terms of both "ethical," "good" and "integrity" standards.

Edited to reiterate an important statement above: "At the end of the day the player gets the full picture, which is the most important thing."