Melanie I know you're going to read this so unlike these plebs I think you're pretty HMU
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3pidemic
Melanie, don't listen to these kids. I'd drink your bath water any day
For what it's worth, I find her quite fetching*. But that's not the issue — she deserves some barbs because of her involvement with Lock (as alluded to above).
Spoiler:
*although not based on the photo above. Funny how popular selfies have become with the overly vain, when that's probably the least flattering way to take one's photo. #longlensesarebetter
For what it's worth, I find her quite fetching*. But that's not the issue — she deserves some barbs because of her involvement with Lock (as alluded to above).
I thought she looked beautiful on PAD. IMO she looks redic in this tweet.
She shilled for a criminal enterprise. She told worried people to calm down while she lived that high stakes yolo jewelry buying selfie posting good life on their dime. To me, that makes her ugly no matter how good looking she actually is.
She deserves to be needled and this photo is a clear indicator of what a narcissist she is.
I thought she looked beautiful on PAD. IMO she looks redic in this tweet.
She shilled for a criminal enterprise. She told worried people to calm down while she lived that high stakes yolo jewelry buying selfie posting good life on their dime. To me, that makes her ugly no matter how good looking she actually is.
She deserves to be needled and this photo is a clear indicator of what a narcissist she is.
Perhaps I should go searching through the Lock pro call-out thread before asking this, but is there a general scorecard of who actively shilled/defending the site versus those who remained silent? Not that the latter deserves a free pass, but the former is definitely worse in my book.
Just trying to figure out where Callisto would rate on the UB scale, where someone like Eric Baldwin (who merely wore the logo) is a 1 but Annie Duke (who stood by the site tooth and nail) is a 10. One of the rare places where Annie Duke is a 10, by the way.
Perhaps I should go searching through the Lock pro call-out thread before asking this, but is there a general scorecard of who actively shilled/defending the site versus those who remained silent? Not that the latter deserves a free pass, but the former is definitely worse in my book.
Just trying to figure out where Callisto would rate on the UB scale, where someone like Eric Baldwin (who merely wore the logo) is a 1 but Annie Duke (who stood by the site tooth and nail) is a 10. One of the rare places where Annie Duke is a 10, by the way.
Compared to Annie Duke I think she is only a 5 or 6 mostly because of her ambivalent "you guys need to calm down" attitude.
TLDR;
-Melanie is disappointed in 2+2 users for questioning her integrity.
-You are delusional if you think her representing lock effects her integrity.
-Breaking contract with Lock would "accomplish nothing."
-Name drops Moorman, who would later accomplish nothing by ending his contract with lock before things got way out of hand.
-The Lock Pro team is working hard to "get to the bottom of this."
-Admits she and other pros are directly responsible for getting signups.
-Lock pros have no culpability or involvement regarding payouts.
-Won't take Lock money for payment in market place (lol).
-Assures everyone that cashouts are imminent.
-Concrete time frames have been established and the ship is turning around.
In her own words:
Spoiler:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Callisto 5
Hi guys,
These are all my own views/ opinions and not a statement from Lock.
My thread in Marketplace
I'll preface this post by saying I am truly let down by some of the posters here. I'm speaking to those who have brought their issues with Lock into a personal marketplace thread. Asking pros to comment on the Lock situation, while certainly out of place in marketplace, is not out of line in general. But suggesting that because of Lock's operational issues, my credibility in marketplace is actually in question is ludicrous. Every person posting in that thread knows full well I have a pristine marketplace record over years of buying and selling action regardless of sponsorship. Even more importantly, they know that nearly everyone in the top tier of known players would and have vouched for me. Those that don't know that can easily ascertain that information. I suspect not one of them is truly delusional enough to think that my wearing a Lock patch is in any way tantamount to whether or not I am a person who can be trusted with a tournament investment.
Furthermore, the situation on marketplace is, and has always been, that any person has a right to accept and refuse payment types as they see fit. Representing a site does not mean you are obligated to accept payment for private action on that site, nor does not doing so indicate lack of integrity. Not offering it as a payment option does not represent a lack of faith in the site--it is simply whatever the seller deems most convenient at the time, as getting together money to buy in for a live event from multiple sources is pretty tedious. In this personal case, I chose not to accept Lock, Bitcoin, Intertops, Carbon, Party, 888, or any other site or online poker currency aside from the site that allows buying in through the client. I do not accept Lock or any of those other methods as I cannot receive EPT winnings via them, and therefore will not send out winnings via them. Clear and simple.
Because of that (in response to one of the players posting) it is, in fact, unreasonable for people to claim that the harassment regarding Lock is under some purely well-intentioned desire for "some disclosure" about a player asking to be staked and her sponsorship. There is nothing undisclosed with regard to my position. I am a pro for Lock and have been for a year and a half. My tournament history and results are available publicly. I am extremely well known within the poker community, and have been so for years. I often sell action on 2+2, with a flawless history of both buying and selling over five years on the site. The questions about the transparency of the operations of Lock Poker and its current issues, while extremely important right now in the poker world, are completely inappropriate under the guise of "addressing a player's integrity in marketplace," given the very available information on just that.
I have a lot of faith in the 2+2 community, and I don't believe that most of you actually think interrogating me about my sponsorship is actually related to my trustworthiness to sell action. What I do believe is that the community wants all the issues Lock is currently facing addressed (and rightfully so), and that some of you have gone so long in a state of frustration with little to no contact from the company that you are trying to get your voices heard in any way possible. I'm disappointed with the witch hunt attitude that 2+2 posters have taken, and while I recognize the frustration, there are better channels to do it through. But ignoring the inappropriate way it has been handled, I understand how badly the community has been let down by Lock (and especially the lack of official communication) and therefore will try to outline as much of the pro situation as I currently can.
Lock Representation
Why do the pros represent Lock? Why do we continue to be ambassadors for a site that is causing so many problems for the poker community with the cashout delays and rumors of insolvency? The implication is that we're just using our names and brands in order to selfishly promote, and take a paycheck from, a site that is screwing over their players.
But the truth is, jumping ship, breaking contract, and leaving Lock would accomplish absolutely nothing except dissolving important channels that the site has to the community, which are damned important channels to maintain in order for any of these problems to be rectified. No pro in his/her ethical right mind should spend years promoting a site, signing their friends and peers up through it, and then decide to peace out when issues arise and the going gets tough. I personally feel responsible for encouraging many players to join the site, and the other pros and I feel that we have a responsibility to all those players who signed up under us in good faith, making it unacceptable to abandon our responsibilities here rather than work to improve the situation.
The cashout situation and the role of Lock Pros
Many 2+2ers seem to be unaware of this, but the pro team is mostly part of marketing and not involved in any important financial transactions or operations with regards to assets. Despite our lack of involvement in the back-end of things, I know that all the pros have wanted to speak to the issue for some time, and have only waited this long in order to gather some real information about the current status of operations. We've spent a lot of time recently working on getting to the bottom of things. The entire Lock pro team met today in order to hash out all these issues and find solutions and information on what the future holds and what kind of improvements can be made, on what scale, and in what timeframe. Every one of the pros on the team--Moorman, Stout, Annette, myself--comes from a grinding background and identifies completely with the issues, especially in a post-BF world where we've seen exactly how bad it can get. Our primary concern is getting answers to the cashout issues, especially in more of a concrete fashion than "they will improve."
Now, the pros aren't and won't be privy to the specific financials of Lock, but do know for sure that Lock, as an American-facing site, faces a lot of behind-the-scenes issues with processing (not to mention the latest transfer issues, which I can confirm are 100% a true issue and have been for some time) and volume limitations on said processing, as one might expect.
Some posters complain that the pros aren't using their positions to demand answers for the players. This couldn't be farther from the truth. The pros have been instrumental in reinforcing the severity of these issues to those in charge and making damned sure that specific situations are addressed. We've been unhappy promoting the site without solid projections for improvement, have said so, and spent the last week approaching those in charge on behalf of the community, and thankfully gotten some answers. Pros have been told that a lot of the cashout issues have been resolved in the wake of the resolution of money laundering and the abuse of the transfers. As of today, we have been told that Skrill cashouts will return to what they were (1-2 weeks) for ROW. We have been told that this will return to normal by June. We've also been told that playthrough requirements will be fixed and communicated properly. This post here reinforces Lock's focus on improvement rather than promotion.
The pros have tried to get concrete info for American issues as well, but there are no concrete time frame improvements we have been given for those cashouts, as the issues facing American processing remain grossly difficult. This doesn't excuse the insanely long times or arduous cashout process, and frankly nothing does, but it isn't being ignored. The people pointing to the smaller skins paying out American players ignore the KEY fact that they process an insanely small fraction of the cashouts that Lock processes, and therefore are under far less risk when processing quickly. None of this is to say American cashouts aren't a priority--they are just subject to a lot more resistance and obstacles than ROW.
The last thing any of us want to do is make excuses for the current situation on Lock's behalf. But as far as the pros are concerned, our responsibility lies with using our positions within the company to make sure things get on the right track--not to sit idly by while things get worse, or abandon all the players who have signed up through us to Lock. We aren't happy with the status quo. Better communication is paramount. Bottom line-- we've been given some concrete timeframes at this point and we're with the players here expecting to see results based on those timeframes. If Lock can make progress here, we feel that the ship can be righted.
