Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilbury Twist
For what it's worth -- which ain't much -- this is how I read your initial statement of "painting Leggett more favorably then previously planned." At no point did I think you would completely exonerate him.
Since you yourself used the analogy of a "nut low," where would you put Leggett knowing what you know now? In other words, if Pierson or Kozai are the equivalent of a No. 1, what is Leggett? Maybe a smooth eight?
I guess 8 seems close. His options were to tow the line and do PR for a site that did large payouts or resign. He chose the former and players got a lot more back than Greg/Russ wanted to give back. Some of his 2008 PR is fatuous and self-serving. The interview with the CBC chic was ridiculous.
He should have demanded Hellmuth/Duke resign from the brand. We gained possession of internal investigation documents at Cereus and it's clear he chose to not gloss over what they found. The IRS is gonna love our film (well, in a world where UB criminals get punished that is).
Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerXanadu
One beef with this article, which is otherwise very good. John furthers a long understood idea that engineers at ieLogic had no idea about the cheating tool. That was dispelled by Jack Bates who described engineering meetings at ieLogic where most of the important engineers attended. They all knew about the existence of the tool, even if some were adverse to the idea. Some, like Brian Russ just sold a tale and moved on. Bates suggests they have all been silent to protect equity grants in ieLogic. Some of these most definitely converted into equity in iovation, hence the long wall of silence from techies who know a lot.