Your man, Gags said he liked it this way and you gave it a +1

What made you change your tune?

What exactly needs to be approved? It will just be like 888/WSOP/UP

Cicakman, just noticed you were the one who pretty much updated this thread, so thank you for that. Could we get any details on who you spoke with? We are all working toward the same goal here so I will drop the animosity. Did they give you any kind of time-table for this?

no. ummm soon? i cant say and dont want to speculate further on what i may have heard. i want to say they are aware and arent against it and its in a process to get it fixed, but im not certain and dont know what or when.

its so sad that a nine page thread on a pretty pressing issue hasnt been addressed by the party poker rep in 4 months.

Any updates?

cickaman, I got this one buddy

no. ummmm, soon? lol

LOL

ask the dge

What does the DGE have to do with this? This is Party's issue. None of the other sites have this problem.

DGE are the ones that are regulating online gaming in NJ.

Even small/simple changes to a "casino" (both online and Brick and Mortar) become painfully long and frustrating process.

Party is the only site trying to change their lobbys layout, but they are certainly not the only ones that the DGE has left hanging for way too long.

they have to approve it. same reason ultimate doesnt have plo. stuck in the dge. its not like party says hey dge can we show tables in our lobby? ya sure! change it now!

lol sure, it's the dge

But the Party Rep went running (or said he went running) to the DGE about this back in Dec

I would guess that the showing tables issue actually isn't a DGE thing since the original software had a way to easily 'fix' it so that tables were showing. Since the DGE has to signoff on software releases (pretty sure they do at least), that means they signed off on software that had the ability to show tables with a little tinkering. So either they weren't thorough in checking the software, or they don't give a ****.

Who knows I could be wrong, but I really think it's just more or less a business decision by Party. Which I do understand but it still sucks.

same thing that you were wrong about with borgata chip thing.

bro, I have never been wrong about anything

Back to the matter at hand, has the Party Rep been running to the DGE since December or did he lie to us?

Did they get you to be the unpaid face of the franchise on here?

the dge is slow

well, if that's the case they might want to think about picking up the pace as NJ revenues from online gambling are like what 20% of projected?

maybe they dont care, maybe they blame something else, maybe borgata chip **** clogged everything up.

or maybe the dge has nothing to do with this, and Party just doesn't give a **** about what the players want. Given their customer service and track record I'm gonna go with that.

Yeah really. WSOP/888 have table selection so why could this not be approved.

Curious - does anyone know of Party's ROW software have table selection? The old Party Poker from pre-2006 did. So is it really a DGE issue, or was the anonymity by design?

does the Party Rep even come here anymore? i haven't seen him/her respond to even softball questions for quite a while now. idk what the point of this forum is supposed to be.

LOL Party Rep shows up to pseudo-spam a bunch of other threads but doesn't touch this one.

Is there a reason we can't get an update on simple requests that players have been asking from day 1? (A) fix the lobby and (B) show cards when players are all in.

And don't give me this DGE bs without a real explanation. The idea the DGE needs to approve these changes doesn't make sense when the other sites have both of these features in their software ... unless the DGE needs to approve *any* change made to the software, which I guess is possible ... but then tell us (a) that, (b) when you submitted the request to change, and (c) when you expect a response.

This would make a lot of sense, expect for the fact the Party has put out multiple updates to their software since launch. So if Party actually took this to DGE back in December, it should have been approved before those updates.

+1Mirrion

Agreed ... I was going to add that, but then figured that I can't really know for sure if there is a reason for the delay on this issue, or whether those other issues weren't somehow submitted so much earlier to the DGE ... so I left it out. But the point seems right.

you guys assume the dge will approve 100% of things and in a timely fashion without saying no ever?