Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorkus Malorkus
LOL at "it's just a staking deal gone bad". He's a long-term losing player who bankrupted himself playing poker then continued to play poker and lose more money. He's written the most hilarious PLO guide in the history of PLO guides. His serious Stox videos are (according to many here at least, most of whom don't appear to have any vested interest in the case at hand, I will readily admit I haven't seen any myself) pretty much crap and of no value to even break-even players at mid-stakes+. He was falsely advertised as a $1m winner, with apparently nothing having been done to check this out. There are dozens of complaints relating to the quality and quantity of his coaching in here and yet you want to call this "a staking deal gone bad"? Because a few people might have slightly embellished a small part of their grievances against Jason amid the complete torrent of complaints about his coaching, you're willing to write everything off and call it a "staking deal gone bad"? Come on, you're smarter than this.
You say some complaints have been proven false. Which complaints? How have they been proven? This is as bad as when FT support gets ragged on here for closing people's accounts with nothing more than "you broke the rules!" as a reason. If you're not prepared to back statements like that up, why are you posting them at all?
You have also taught us all such stunning insight as "victims of scams tend to be naive" and "victims of scams often have a hard time outing themselves in public" and proceed to highlight this as some sort of unusual behaviour that is worthy of note. Really?
Look, I understand you want to be seen as the voice of balance and reason amid the madness of this topic, but frankly it's making you look more than a little silly at present.
|
QFT
I don't understand why, TT, but your comments in this thread certainly make it look as if you are willfully blind to what's really going on here. I'm not sure how anyone could read all the information posted so far and describe it as "basically a staking deal gone bad". For starters, that is completely dismissive of what I think is the broader concern here: The role of Stoxpoker in backing this individual with their brand, and questions about what reasonable precautions they took to verify his claims and track record (particularly since they appear to have advertised him as a coach with the "$1 million winner" claim).
I will say that everything that Jason from Stox has posted ITT about their process is reassuring, putting aside their potential role in this clusterfudge to begin with.
TT, pointing out that the people who got scammed are naive is obvious and ridiculous, imo. To a certain extent, scammers gonna scam, and there will always be people out there willing to buy into those scams. That makes it all the more important that legitimate businesses like Stoxpoker, who earn business based on their reputation and an implied promise of results, make sure that reputation is backed up by, at a minimum, qualified non-scammers as coaches.
Finally, here's a question: If an individual who
a) appears, over significant sample sizes, to be a losing player,
b) who, based on descriptions here, shows signs of being a gambling addict,
c) gives multiple people (including another Stox) coach the impression of not knowing wtf he's talking about,
d) entered into bankruptcy months before being hired on as a coach,
can be a Stox poker coach, then what exactly is their screening process excluding?
Two Plus Two
Re: Where did the Jason Ho thread get moved to?
Linear Mode
