Quote:
Originally Posted by idun215
Harsh but fair. Stars is saving themselves from a headache in the future. Lets say for example Stars allows him to play dad gets itchy fingers and plays on sons account and proceeds to donate sons entire roll. Is Stars at fault? Or is Son at Fault? .
Surely son would password protect both his computer and pokerstars client if he felt his father was a degenerate capable of blowing his sons bankroll?
Interesting that the son asks if he moves out would this change things and they said no - what about these guys that live in "poker houses" and one of them self excludes - does that mean all the other housemates are banned for 6 months too even if the guy moves out?
All seems rather harsh to me. It should be up to the son to password protect and stars should accept that.
