Loose front, gin back. Don't call them out. This is beyond debate.

Agree a site of this kind would be great. Feel it would be a massive undertaking however and would need alot of full time staff to make this work.

One thing that 2+2 could do to help prevent scams is have another look at the posting requierments in the MP. Have previously brought up how relaxed and outdated these are for different reasons but also apply to scammers.

Essentially all you need is a account 6 months old and MP approval which isn't hard to get at all. You don't need to post stats you don't need to post anything really.

Posting on phone but will throw out some ideas of what changes i think would be good later.

Thank you for the link and description, food for thought for sure. Seems like a very well organized project.

would be great to have some of the following in any kind of poker reputation website that will be put up by you guys, thanks

A place where the following is MANDATORY

Your own personal profile page which has :
a) a list of ALL your online pokersite screen names, one or more of which should be authenticated by the site
b) an organised summary (and links to further breakdowns if required) of ALL the action you have sold to other people
c) an organised summary (and links to further breakdowns if required) of ALL the action you have bought from other people
d) links/access to players interactions with other players both poker and non-poker related
e) links/access to any transgressions, incidences, achievements acquired by the player over the years
f) info on players registration/recently logged in/activity status

A place where the following is EXPECTED

1) clear, precise and accurate information relating to details on the sales of action, i.e, percentages, pokersites online / live venues, total costs, final results, payments received, payments sent out, etc, etc
2) timely completion of all transactions and all timestamps publicly available for scrutiny
3) access to view the constant flow of borrowing/lending/staking/sidebetting situations going on, whether completed, ongoing or proposed
4) some kind of points/feedback/rating system which can give the public a fast idea of a persons creditability and workability platform
5) some kind of private messaging system which you can use to ask questions about a player to other players who you know have in some way dealt with or are dealing with the person you wish to deal with
6) some kind of 'purgatory/suspension/limbo' place where players who are currently undergoing problems/disputes/scamalerts are put and required to prove their cases before being cleared/banned as the case may be

A place where the following is DESIRED

I) access to communicate with players/horses to discuss/confirm deals in online/live poker events
II) wider range of voices/opinions on all matter of poker and player related issues
III) possibility to increase your networking area of poker players no matter where you are on the newbie>>>>veteran scale
IV) possibility to partake in 100% safe ( and I mean, safe, not guaranteed profit!) investments in other players poker actions
V) promotional incentives to help both stakers and stakees to get actively involved in all areas of poker relations
VI) building of community spirit/honour/trustworthiness amongst users
VII) strong possibilities of 'sniffing out' would be scammers as zebest7r mentioned earlier

A place where the following is OPTIONAL


z) some kind of transactional interface for safe dealing
y) some kind of communicational interface for instant questions/advice/chat etc
x) some kind of support system

Well, I think that's all I can think of on my own, but, this list is by no means exhaustive and I am sure that others can and will add lots more to it, good luck!

If you made the site,would you ever consider a small charge of say $1 to put up a package and this money goes into an insurance fund in the event that if any one ever won and didn't pay out then investors could claim it back?

hi pandick

yeah, I think that's an excellent idea, perhaps charge just one measly dollar for every event/stake/deal that is put up by anyone and keep it as insurance and also to cover site running costs

can possibly even have a kinda 'site currency', whereby shares can be bought using this 'site currency' and is held in escrow by the site until the event/stake/deal is completed successfully (whether in profit or loss is irrelevant of course ) and all results entered and only after the investors are happy that things have been done properly , then they can authorise the release of the funds to the horse, but , if investors think that something is amiss in the horses play or any errors, then the stake can go to a dispute/arbitration area

thanks for the input sir!

So its basically chipmeup but with insurance?

As much as I see why people are advocating the need for such a site I think the idea of detailing peoples financial history would present substantially more problems and scam opportunities than it solves.

As a previous poster mentioned a lot of scams that are carried out are by people who have an unblemished record.

In addition to this by creating a site which enables people to increase their trust levels of certain people we may actually find that this presents more opportunities to defraud people.

Lastly, as there are already many sites where selling action is possible why would a player want to provide so much information and jump through hoops when it is very easy for a winning player to sell action already.

Ty for raising some interesting points Omahaha.

As I've stressed before, most of the information regarding financial history would not be public, and be under full control of the users. For example, if I were to ask you for a stake, I could decide to make my parts of my player profile and financial history available to you and you only, for the sake of convincing you that I would be a good horse.

I've had this argument come up a lot, but I don't think it really diminishes the impact a site like this (I'll just say PKR for pokerrep from now on) could have.

Sure, the most difficult scam to prevent would be one from a trusted member of the community with an unblemished record. However, we could still make it difficult for such a member to pull off certain types of scam; for example, a kidcardiff overselling shares type fiasco is super easy to make impossible regardless of the members status withing the community.

While I do agree that a lot of scams get carried out by people with no documented history of shady behavior, we still need to centralize the info regarding those scams to incapacitate them within the community...

And a quick "scammer+thief" search on 2+2 will convince you that there are probably far more repeat offenders than there are first timers, which makes complete sense given our lack of structure.

A few easy to find examples from 2+2:




That's like saying don't meet other players IRL, you might find yourselves trusting them more and open yourself up to being scammed more.
People have to do their due diligence, but more structure and more info can not be a bad thing.

It's not just about selling action. And it's not just about the select few who can sell action really easily due to past results or status in the community. For an up and coming player, providing information and jumping through hoops would enable him to get to the position where he can sell his action and prove his worth.

I think we should be more ambitious about the scope of PKR.

A site currency with third party escrow may solve the problem sending a player $ for a stake and losing the investment when said player cashes and decides to take off with the loot. But there are so many other problems, small and big, to address within our community...

In no particular order :

• Wannabe scammers friend request spamming 200 players to misrepresent their network and make themselves look trustworthy
• A player overselling MTT shares
• People borrowing money, with unclear repayment conditions or when already in debt
• A player with a shady past being able to operate because information is not centralized/easily accessible/visible
• A player engaging in bad or unclear deals because there are so few templates/guidelines to help him
• Players getting lost in a dispute because there is no easily accessible trace of their dealings - typically in staking situations, but also with regards to prop betting/sports betting, loans, etc.
• Players displaying huge lack of professionalism (drunken BJ the night before a HR, arriving late at tourneys and punting after having sold action...) not really risking being exposed publically
• No efficient system for people to get to know each other on a more personal basis than just poker stats
• Players multiaccounting, VPNing...
• A player impersonating well known community members
• Undisciplined players unable to protect themselves from their degen tendencies
• Players keeping quiet to have better odds of recouping money, thereby letting dishonest people keep going
• etc., etc., etc.

You're suggesting a hedge fund, with investor participation, all of which is blind to applicants looking for staking. So you'd have that loose front end, and a committee behind it.

The difference between hedging and insurance is one of transparency. If you go this route, then you may as well put up a subscription for staking site.

These exist informally. Someone also mentioned having poker sites verify user names and legitimacy after a fashion.

That collapses the Chinese wall a site like this would need to prosper on the terms that are desired here.

At some point OP and others interested are going to have to realize while there are risk mitigation strategies, there are no strategies that offer zero risk that can comfortably tuck in new blood (i.e. new stakees with uncertain history)

So any or all ventures with this premise will need to realize that there is no way to completely make such a gamble (and a gamble is what it is) exactly zero-risk.

See above sheets' mild surprise at some random (I haven't been around for years, it's the same dreck anyway) being able to peel away 6 figs.

So the owners/operators will have to set their own risk tolerance and mitigation strategies.

Cool idea

There ARE strategies that offer zero risk that can comfortably tuck in new blood. The site currency is the perfect example. Staking funds would be paid by investors to the site in site currency form and these are held by the site until all the games have been played by the seller selling the action, and only released to the seller once all results have been entered and confirmed correct and no investor has any dispute with them. This is ZERO risk, as, if there is ANY doubt or question over what was played/not played, etc, then funds are held until all issues resolved.

The ONLY downside to this is that the seller must have his/her own funds to play the sold games with the guarantee of getting the funds back once he/she shows that all the games/mtts etc were played according to what was sold/offered to investors.

If the site wishes to charge a very nominal fee (of say $1 per each deal/event created) GIVEN that the investment will be ZERO RISK for ALL concerned, then this would help sustain the site and promote a clear and transparent arena within which stakers and stakees can participate in.

[ ] I'm back.

Horse can tank. You going to sweat every hand your stakee plays via TV or w/e too?

there is no such thing as zero risk when it comes to $ and investments

the purpose of this site is to mitigate those risks as much as possible

When you said 'zero-risk', I assumed you meant the risk associated with the horse running with the funds without playing the games or not playing the games that the money was intended for, or overselling his games , in which case, my idea is ZERO RISK

OBVIOUSLY there is NO gamble in the known universe which is zero risk, otherwise, it wouldn't be a 'gamble'

read response to above quote

I assume when people talk of zero-risk investments in poker, they are referring to the non-variance aspect of the investment, in that their money will ONLY be used for what they are paying for and NOTHING else, this is what would be zerorisk in staking. The result of the investment obviously cannot be termed as zerorisk, and has nothing to do with the risk taken when 'trusting' a horse

The latest post on the negative feedback thread is a typical example of why something needs to be done. First-time offenders are clearly not our only problem.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...php?p=42366610 is another example from the sheets list thread. Pretty old thread, that got a lot of replies, crazy that so little came of it...