No matter who the representative is for lock someone will not be happy with what and how they say it. I guarantee Shane is under certain restrictions of what and what he can not say, I understand he hasn't went the best way about discussing a lot of situations, but no matter who the representative is for lock would most likely be in the same boat. Josephs post to me was a joke, maybe I am wrong I didn't even see a second post by him. I will agree with Shane, if they can return the cash outs to a reasonable time frame that will do a lot of restoring faith in the customers of lock, now instead of bsing about it for months on end, they actually have to do it.

Maybe Eric Lynch can step it up for Shane.

Lock has already shown that they don't care enough about their customers to send someone else.

They treat their players the way a crack dealer treats crackheads.

He would just be back as imnotshane , plus he would enjoy fooling or thinking he was fooling the 2+2 players . Jen has him trained good he leaves the toilet seat up. Plus things could get worse if they hire a someone who lies are not spotted so easy.

No crack dealers treat there customers better because they are smart enough to know that there is other crack dealers and the crack heads will go to them.

Depends on what the definition of remove is

Did they? While I was in contact with admin about the different Lock problems before their discussion with Lock, I wasn't privy to exactly what was discussed and haven't asked, but perhaps you have. But if you haven't, then I think you're reading something into the statement that wasn't there. Lock promising to put a new rep in the forum in no way implies that 2+2 wanted that or requested it. It also doesn't imply that Shane will be removed.

Oh yeah great idea.. Let's remove Shane from 2+2 so in the future all of us can communicate with Quinn through email... that would really help... zzzZZZzzz

Yes because where getting so much useful information from him now it would be devastating if he was gone. I love being told bold faced lies on a daily basis that insult my intelligence go get some sleep.

I think it's fair to say Shane isn't making an appearance at the next 2+2 party

Edit: Unless it's in Portugal

this.

I don't know.

You can only BS so well when your company is a scam. Shane IS good at it. Some of his responses are quite intelligent on stringing people along a little longer which is what Lock probably wants him to do.

It would simply be better for zero advertisement and zero responses so people would finally give up hope on their money.

I know you can say "hey how am I going to get my money if we don't heckle them?" which is so sad and brainwashed. You are not suppose to heckle companies to get paid, if they are honest they will pay all of us without any attention.

We won't get anyone else because who would want that job? Shane's name has been trashed badly enough by this (google Shane Bridges poker) that he won't be able to get another job in his field so you can't expect him to leave and no one would want their reputation in the gutter like his so basically they're stuck with each other.

^^ I'd take the gig, in a heartbeat. All that would need to take place is a new owner (or the current one waking up one morning, having an epiphany, and actually running her company with accountability and care for her customers), a guaranteed commitment to getting all backlogged players paid with two weeks, and a new payout setup that gets players paid within no more than 30 days from withdraw request, even in "high volume" times. I think Lock would benefit from someone who actually would respond with real answers and have the autonomy to at least be able to treat everyone with due respect and basic human dignity.

Then what do you say when lock tells you that none of that "commitment" can be accomplished?

Then I wouldn't work for them. I'm wouldn't take a gig and just tow the company line if it meant lying, deceiving, and/or misleading people. Sorry if it sounds childish or basic, but I was raised to treat others the way I wanted to be treated, and that honesty generally is always the best policy. And besides, the truth is always the easiest thing to remember.

You would rather have no rep at all than have Shane? lol...

The only contribution that the current rep makes is to make promises that never come to fruition that things are going to get better. I think we can do without that.

I've only been an active member of the Lock forum on here since December, but I can't think of anything positive that Shane has contributed in that time.

No, I have not asked nor was privy to the discussions they had.

All I have are Mason's statements from a month ago where the following was said on May 3 and May 6.




You are correct that it is not directly stated that 2+2 requested that they do this. But technically, it is also not stated that Lock wanted to remove their promotional stuff or have their banners taken down. Yes, they "voluntarily" are doing this. But it almost certainly came as a suggestion from 2+2 one would assume. But again, you are correct that this is not directly stated and I inferred it perhaps incorrectly.

^^another promise from Lock that they never delivered on. Just add it to the pile

A couple more quotes from Mat about this further in the initial thread of May 3. You are correct that it was never stated that Shane would be removed. It is still my belief that that should happen. But clearly not everyone agrees with that take (based on the other thread).

Anyway, this quote indicates that we would be provided with a new rep who would interact here. This has not happened. A new rep appeared for 1 post...but did zero interaction.




Regardless, it does not appear that Shane will be leaving...and apparently will be the only representative on here. This is not in line with the 4 things that Mason told us would be happening (regardless of who suggested what) but I'm also not sure there is much that can be done about that unfortunately.

Lock holds all the proverbial cards here and there isn't much we can do about it. 2+2 can insist that Lock abide by the previous 4 things but Lock doesn't have to do that if they don't want to. 2+2's only recourse is to give them the boot...and I don't think they want to do that nor does the community want them to do that.

Still, if Lock agreed that they would be doing something (providing a new rep) then it would be nice if they actually did what they said they were going to do. But I guess we're all really used to Lock not staying true to their word by now.

He should be demodded, imo.

I don't think site rep mods are like regular mods, in the sense they don't have the same kind of access regular mods do.

I'm not really up on the specifics, though. Site reps are given power to clean up their own forums but little else AFAIK. I haven't seen any evidence recently that Shane is "modding" much of anything (for example, I'm not seeing posts or threads that he's deleted).

Site rep mods are set up as such so that users know who a site's "official" representative here on 2p2 is, and they have to follow certain guidelines about where and how they respond and promote their site. Demodding Shane wouldn't really accomplish anything except change the color of his name.

Yeah, I didn't want to make a big deal about who agreed to what on the new rep, but I just thought you might be leaping to conclusions a little bit (they weren't unreasonable conclusions, mind you) and honestly had no idea if you had asked questions of Mat privately that I hadn't. My assumption always was that they had a conversation about the problems, Mat & Mason made some requests, and Lock offered up a new rep as something they thought might help. The last post of Mat's you quoted would seem somewhat consistent with that.

If it's really important to OP, or anyone else, they could certainly PM Mat and ask him, and let him know how important they think it is that a new rep is put forward. Personally, I think that's pretty low on the list of priorities. It also might just provide another distraction as the new rep uses much of the same Lock lingo as Shane did and then we have hundreds of posts speculating whether this really is a new rep or just Shane again (I put the over/under on "Hi Shane!" posts at 10). Is a new rep with the same story going to change anything? It might lower a few people's blood pressure when they're getting answers they don't like from someone different, but I suspect that would wear off fairly quickly. It certainly is possible that a new rep could be put forward that people would consider more customer friendly, but in the end, the answers are what matter most. And of course the actions matter even more.

Right. Shane has the ability to moderate posts (edit, delete, etc.) within this forum, but Lock has always done very, very little of that. There's a trail left when posts are edited or deleted, so if a lot of that was suddenly happening, it could be dealt with fairly easily.

TBH, I wouldn't mind if they did a little more cleaning up now in terms of locking and/or merging a few threads. I'm loath to mess with any of the threads myself, because I'm not someone who has money tied up and feels the need to vent about my issues, but I really think the forum is getting more and more unreadable as people keep starting threads that pretty much duplicate others or have no real purpose - do we really need "When will Lock collapse", "Is Lock Poker a scam (poll)", "The distressing, sad reality is: Lock could end this now", "Shanespeak", etc., etc., etc.? But I suspect Lock is also reluctant to do a lot of moderating and further upset people. So I guess things stay the way they are unless people start complaining. /derail

i'll take the over