Wouldnt it be standard for a business like ptp to have a separate account to run their business? All the admins have their own playing accounts, Ive played against them all in private tornies and whatnot over the years, not once have I ever seen RBNation(FTP account) or payneverbeg(Stars account) at a table. Id imagine every rakeback company on the planet has a separate account to run their business and multiple admins access it Im sure, and Im sure they all got their own playing accounts. Wouldnt this be standard for just about every poker affiliate? Im seriously asking, I dont know how it works. I do pretty much know how PTP/RBNation do things. I just always imagined every affiliate did things that way also.

Throughout this thread all I can really help but wonder is how you somehow really care if multiple people have access to this account...and whether or not its violating Poker Stars rules if its not used for poker playing but for business. How would that affect your life or anyone's life in a negative manner whatsoever?

Get the **** over it.

I think it sounds fairly standard. It's debatable whether that is "personal use", but I wouldn't have expected much different reply from Stars.

And here's an idea...if you want to sign up to participate on a website, you should probably plan on abiding by the simple rules they set forward for their members.

For someone that seems to be so uptight about following all the rules you seem to do a damn good job ignoring the easy ones.

No need to be so defensive, sir

One huge point missed re: collusion - Why would a horse want to collude/soft play/chip dump to another horse? They get nothing from doing this, only the backer would - it makes no sense.. And then if you say it could happen, I will remind you that dozens of people who play together online, talk on skype etc, are much more likely to soft play each other and you would never know..

Thanks for wasting 10minutes of my life, please PM bax and sheets with your issues..

are you people actually stupid or just being purposely naive?

so basically, it would never happen, but if it does, everyone else is doing it. good logic.

youve probably wasted a lot more than that, based on your post.

id love to hear some commentary by you idiots on the relative ev's of two stacks with x chips vs 1 stack with 2x chips, or the actual mechanics of these staking sites, or anything other than 'GTFO IMO' posts.

there is a legitimate issue here, and the kinds of responses being posted by the backed community are lending it credibility.

What do you mean "you people"?!?!?

I love how in a thread about people chopping 4man HUSNGs with a partner, everyone was up in arms about collusion even though it's impossible to gain an edge by doing so, while you have something like MTTs were threat is very real and everyone just goes "yeah right, like that owuld ever happen."

I think these are important questions and were at least part of my reason for making this thread. I've always wondered if a poker account could be used for a business. For example could 2plus2 use or have their own special account in their store?

I'm all for that if it's an obvious business practice. Now that I am aware that payneverbeg does not play poker on its poker account I'm at least partially less concerned. I still think that there is some material unfairness to poker players having access to a second account along with their poker account. There are situations that could allow this feature to be abused. How can we really know if the players associated with this account are able to transfer money from their poker account and then cashout with this special payneverbeg account that doesn't have any playthrough requirements?

I am happy to see the new updates they did on staking because of this. I think they could create a way to apply for a payment account for people who want one though and to somehow identify what those accounts are by adding information to the screen names. Maybe they could put a Pokerstars business account in the store.

mostly people making posts like this

Perhaps the responses are so incredulous because the idea that staking would somehow propagate collusion is a foreign idea to them. Perhaps you should do some research into how a staking site actually operates and then you might have some sort of realistic perspective on the topic.

Completely ignoring morality and rules set in place to prevent such actions, collusion is in the best interest of anyone that can possibly be involved. Players choose to not collude because either 1) they don't have the means, 2) they don't want to cheat, or 3) they are wary of potential consequences. Perhaps being a member of a staking site DOES increase opportunity to collude, I don't think there is any way of denying that. But so does being part of any other forum online. So does being friends with someone. Would you like to ban friendships?

If anything, being part of a staking website increases the potential consequences of collusion because there are more links between individuals as a result of backing and transfers.

Well where do I sign up for one of these special accounts? I would love to get one to open a store that sells poker shirts or something like that. Or to get my little business going and then recieve transfers and be able to cash them out immediately.

You're like "get the **** over it" when I honestly had no clue that accounts like this even existed and seriously wondered why they were so special and allowed to violate the TOS when I couldn't have this advantage. I'm all for things that I can make money with involving poker.

Plus on top of it these mods and that site especially imo are awful to a lot of members and act arbitary toward them as they did toward me. So when I see situations where they allow a guy to put 20 people in the same tournament I find that to be pretty ironic. The message is it's ok to screw people out of money as long as that person is just some random player and not a member of PTP.

Obvious discrimination aside, if you think his concerns about the use of the payneverbeg accounts are 100% genuine perhaps it is you that is idiotic and naive.