The question should be why they haven't made arrangements to have some form of audit. This is very doable, which has been pointed out over and over again.

Well, I'm afraid that I agree more with your prior opinion, as expressed in this post. He really should have addressed the questions you raised there:

You may have changed your mind, but I think this question is very relevant. In my opinion, an upstanding company with the need to prove its credibility would confront this issue head-on.

This continues to be the key issue.

Are executive/upper management changes planned for lock poker?
Does Lock Poker have a Board of Directors?
If so, who are they and what is their contact info.
Is Lock Poker licensed by any gaming commission anywhere in the world?

p.s. Mike Haven. By the way your e-mail pertaining to an infraction was not specific nor did it reference the violated precondition. In my review of the preconditions and rereading my quote, it appears NOT to be in violation of the preconditions. Please respond and be specific and reference the part of the quote you were offended by, and the precondition it violated. I would have answered privately if not for the inability to do so. AJT

You still sound like our buddy surprised.

- LOL
- Yes, two
- I would call Cipaco or just add Jen to your skype
- They are. CIGA Curacao but you knew that already don't you?

Your infracted post was in this thread: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/19...ad-op-1354573/

Part of the title of the thread is, "[Must read OP]".

Part of the OP, in bold, red letters, states, "... any post in this thread not belonging to either Shane or myself will be reported and the user will receive an infraction or ban from Mike Haven or another moderator."

Your infraction stated, "Disregard of posting rules. Please read OP."

Kindly explain why you don't think the preconditions were violated. (I didn't read your post, so I wasn't offended by whatever content it had.)

Thank you.

*

Edit: I see you posted in the thread again, after receiving the first infraction. You have received an infraction for it, too.

The US Government treats the offshore sites as if they are illegal. They might arrest any owner that sets foot on US soil. The banks treat money received from them as if it carries the plague. Etc; etc.

vindictive27 is right. It boils down to the individual and if he chooses to trust that the site is run as honestly as it can be and wants to be in it for the long haul.

If something goes wrong for the individual, that individual is on his own.

Mike Haven
Sorry, I didn't know some forums were so exclusive. Nice to know autocracy is alive and well even on internet forums. ajt

Surprised?

Learn to read, instead of simply stating your own single thought over and over again.

should have known by "legally binding agreement". Sorry arthur my bad. Got you mixed up with our buddy Surprised.

As for the auditing. In "theory" it's CIGA's job to do so but that has been discussed for a while now too and it's pretty clear that Lock has no interest in having their accounts audited and CIGA doesn't care no matter what CIGA's code of conduct states in regards to auditing.

I been in touch with someone I know in Curacao who works in the industry and to cut a long story short the bottom line of our FB conversation was "...just forget about CIGA doing anything about it..."

Question request

Could you explain the reason and rationale for why Lock will not conduct and supply proof of an independent 3rd party audit to confirm that all player deposits are completely segregated in full?






Mike: I know this has been asked before, but this is another case of the questions and answers getting lost in the shuffle. This issue as it ties in to cashouts is the single most important to players. It is worthy of its own thread IMO. It would also allow us in the audit and accounting field to "address" these issues directly with Shane and perhaps give him a "different perspective" on how these audits would work. Good work, but I will not be sending you any $...............

If anyone can answer this for me I would be very greatful. My understanding of slow cashouts is due to a backlog at the processors. But what caused the backlog in the first place?

Question #6 Thread may be a starting point.

I think this is a great question, and it probably gets right to the heart of all the major issues. Without a credible answer to this, it's hard to understand why any reasonably prudent person would deposit at Lock.

The poker community needs to know. Lock ownership and management should be jumping at the chance to address this question. Please, lets pursue this.

Shane has finally agreed to take a picture next to the segregated player funds!

Welcome back surprised!

hahaha he doesn't give up easily

Sure for starters one was written by another poster and one was written by me.

Lock Poker is Cipaco N.V. as that is the name of our company that the gaming licence is registered with.

JDB Services is another one of our companies that is setup to provide the link between our processors and our players.

Question:
Shane, could you please explain why it is that JDB is listed as domain registrar for Cipaco, Lock, JDB and co?

It is my understanding that Lock is owned and operated by "The Lock Gaming Group". How come that your "payment processing bridge" JDB owns / Registered all the domains and not said gaming group?

Not sure if this question has been asked, but can the whole 'cardschat expidited cashout' saga be explained? All along we were convinced that cashouts were chronological, except for these 'end of batch' requests. I was told by support when I emailed regarding the matter that it was complete BS and that cardschat members were not getting preferential treatment.

Because those domains were registered by the company JDB.

As stated previously JDB is one of our companies, very few business activities happen under gaming brands.

Full Tilt everyone should know by now used software by Tiltware and all of their marketing and support business was handled under Pocket Kings.

Not a single business activity happens under the Merge Gaming name, the actual company that is setup behind that isn't publicised but its definitely there. My business cards might have said Merge Gaming but the name on the office door and who I was paid by was another company name. That is how all of these businesses work.

I would like to point out to everyone that pokerscout has Cipaco N.V. as the owner/operator of Revolution network as well.

I understand what you saying Shane but let's leave other gaming sites out of it. What I don't get is why those domains have been registered by JDB opposed to being registered by Lock, Lock Gaming Group or Cipaco since you said a few times that JDB is just your bridge (or whatever you want to call it) for the 3rd party processors to plugin.

I believe that you understand that this appears to be odd and what I'm really getting at but thanks for the answer anyway.

Because business isn't done (including domain registration) in the company name of the brand.

And the fact that I brought up the other sites was to point out that this isnt unique, its what everyone does.

Its like you are digging for some weird smoking gun that just doesnt exist. Me explaining this multiple ways doesn't change the fact that very little if any business is completed in the online gaming world in the name of the actual gaming brand.

What about pokerscout having cipaco NV as the operator of Revolution, you know the network.

Shane why will you not answer this question?

Shane why have you not responded to my emails or Private Messages?