Exactly, there are waaayyyyyy more legit ways for the government to get this info than a damn forum....lmao...nits.

It's not up for discussion. Posters identifying processors will receive warnings or infractions, going back to the start of the thread.

That being said, you are incorrect. Investigators don't get all the information you think they would. For example, at the Kentucky Supreme Court, the Commonwealth's attorneys had no idea how many online poker players were in the state. When asked for proof of even one, the only thing they could point to was the PPA state membership number (which is not proof -- not all of our members play online).

Also, do you realize that identifying processors is of no value to anyone here? There's absolutely no upside.

Not to mention the google issue

fwiw i've withdrawn from both PS and FT via echeck very recently and it's always been a 3rd party processor name in my bank statement.

You people who are arguing with TE and others about whether or not it is okay to post processor names need to go away.

By your logic, it's not okay for my girlfriend to **** some other guy, but it's okay for me to introduce her to Don Juan DeMarco and suggest that they get to know each other intimately.

+1

Best analogy of the situation ever posted.

Skallagrim

Another good illustration of why we shouldn't post processor info:

Hiding processor names adds to the perception of the illegitimacy of online poker. IOW if it was all okay then we'd have nothing to hide.

On one hand we're saying "online poker is not illegal!" yet we tell each other to lie to bank tellers and scramble like roaches in the light when a processor gets named here.

Perception issues are not caused by us not posting processor information. Rather, they are caused by the DoJ stating that online poker is unlawful and then seizing processors. The perception problem with banks isn't caused by us not proudly declaring our personal business to them (I don't recall anyone saying to lie to banks....I didn't. All we said here was not to volunteer information on our own). Rather, it's caused by confusion banks have with the requirements of UIGEA.

We poker players are standing up for our rights. We're all are expressing our pride as poker players. Many of are writing columns for poker rights, posting pro-poker messages on Internet forums, and promoting poker rights via other media. IMO, those are the steps that demonstate the legitimacy of the game and of our fight, not aiding those who seek to take us down.

FWIW I received a paper check yesterday and it didn't have PSTARS on it anywhere.

My deposit on PS for the bonus showed up on bank statement with the name of processor along with PSTARS next to it. Kind of scary I hope that doesnt put up a red flag on my bank.

UPDATE:

My PS echecks show up as the usual processor names on my statement, but with PSTARS added to it.

Nothing's changed with FT for me.

My processing email from Stars says "this will show up as PStars or an abbreviation on your bank statement

Since this thread came back to life ...

It looks like so far this is just Stars. My premium bank wire from FTP had an innocent and vague business name (presumably the name of the processor).

yup ditto

Deposited for the SCOOP bonus and then cashed it out.

Neither echeck transaction in my checking account had any indication that it was from a poker site. Just the processor name as in the past.

Looks like this is not Star's doing but rather a decision by one of their processors.

I requested 2 paper checks in the past month. Neither had PokerStars written anywhere on it

Not sure of the significance, if any, but when I made a SCOOP reload bonus deposit, the email confirmation said it would show up as a different processor than all of my eChecks had previously listed. I had made 1 reload deposit and 3 withdrawals that all had the same processor and now it's supposed to change names. It has cleared my bank yet so I don't know if it will have the PSTARS or not ... hopefully not.

My latest one did show up with Pstars on it.

Big worry is if banks ever start throwing gambling closed accounts into Chexsystems. If they do, its game over for internet poker in the US.

My latest one DID clear my bank and did NOT have PSTARS listed anywhere that I could see. It was a RELOAD DEPOSIT bonus transaction and not a withdrawal. I do plan to do a withdraw soon - hopefully it will not have PSTARS either.

fwiw, I've done 3 cashouts recently and all 3 said it

I've had four withdrawals in the past two weeks, and none have said it.

Little worrisome that wire transfers appeared to stop working around the same time

echeck withdraw works as of last week. Is that what you mean by wire transfer?

Just got a wire today from PS. It was delayed however