Jason Mo mentionned Deed, cool guest idea.

i don't have any problem with your comments about the galfond op-ed (which i find good) and i don't care, if you have any issues with pokernews. i just wanted to point out, that fair news coverage is an illusion.

many ppl seems to really believe, that 'known newspapers' have plenty of journalist checking facts, while most online editorials have indeed cheap writers (or even freelancers online), who get their facts from other news sources. compared with the paid articles and the biased view, which you find almost anywhere and even in reputable news source, i just don't understand, why you expect 'higher standards' from an affiliate site like pokernews.

it doesn't justify, but it explains it ... and it's not a bigger problem, not even slightly (well unless you don't have a life outside of poker).

don't get me wrong, but if news coverage is so biased, that it helps certain candidates to win elections, to help companies to sweep really important news under the rug or to form an opinion about a certain group of people, than this is a real issue. big companies (oil, weapons, pharmacy ...) have such an influence on daily life and the news, and this literally kills people.

but you really have the urge to 'uncover' the dirty secrets of poker, because most of the people are too naive to understand, that the general guideline "follow the money" is an in-your-face banner on pokernews.

tl;dr

i really think this whole discussion about 'integrity of affiliates' is a waste of time

- there's no solution, because no one wants to pay for quality news
- there are alternative news sites
- there's social media
- there's 2p2 and other forums

so basically everyone, who wants to be informed, gets the news and everyone, who is naive enough to use affiliates as the only news source, don't get all news.

Did Remko actually say that he had done more for poker than JMo?

lol what has jmo ever done for poker? he even admitted himself that it's probably true.

a pointless assertion, sure (like poker would be any worse if it weren't for all of remko's hard work, lol), but not completely out of this world

Yes, like most of the news media, NY times, tv channels, whatever.

They always being paid my someone and/or have political opinions. Tha's why they have to lie, misslead and blablabla.

Its called upswing poker (I'm not advertising mods). I checked it out. At the moment, its clearly catered towards beginners and developing a newbies framework for approaching poker.

Seems like a level.

Just listened to the Kristy Arnette podcast from a little while back. What a snoozer.

Real time life coaching? What about you and your husband playing at the same 2/5NL tables at Aria all the time sitting next to each other everytime I played in Vegas 2 years ago. Maybe a little life coaching on poker ethics is in order...

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29...10/index2.html Please ask Galfond to comment on this too Papi

Perhaps they were comparing each others opening bluff ranges?

Lol whatever gets the bills paid I guess.

I'm going to start saying I'm an airplane pilot because I've accumulated so many sky miles.

Podcasting with Remko and Jason Mo shortly, I have the worst hangover of all time after the awards show last night

a few observations:

- At some point i would like to hear Donnie Peters take on the decision to not publish Deeb. What are your metrics for discretion in these cases? I would contend that the burden of proof for Galfond and Deeb are similar, and IMO the difference is in the parties accused and those accusing. If we are going to talk about informing the public and to stop the vicious cycle, the Deeb/Eli thing has more impact than the Galfond/Touil example. Eli is very well known and could have way more opportunities to scam. Are you factoring the recourse a popular or potentially influential person could have if they felt you were slandering them? If so, can you see why that discretion could be dangerous if poker celebrities are now suddenly too dangerous to go after and this model of outing scammers can only be applied to the little guy?

And if you think Galfond is more trustworthy than Deeb, well then that just makes the topic now "discretion of who you find to be trustworthy" which can also be dangerous. Easy for someone to pull a Kaiser Soze and use PN to do their dirty work.

That's why I think that if you can't publish Deeb, you really can't publish anyone unless the level of proof is just obscene and I don't even know how you attain that level of proof when dealing with poker scammers.


- Remko and JMo know the affiliate build of PN, but a lot of people don't. And for most people, Cardplayer/Bluff/PokerListings are either dead or not popular enough. The brand is pokerNEWS. As a casual observer i feel like PokerNews has almost a monopoly on this stuff (feel free to correct me, i'm sure PokerListings probably has more pull than i think) and so while I know they can't be held to the same standards as the Wall Street Journal, it's annoying that the only game in town is named pokerNEWS and doesn't operate per my definition of NEWS. But that's more a reflection on the LOL nature of journalism, I guess.

something Jmo pointed out which I thought was interesting and hadn't considered was the tactic of using PN to maximize his getting repaid due to the scammer being a fun player that probably doesnt want the PokerNews article to be the first thing to come up when you google the fun player's name.

you can debate if you think Galfond has other debts and whether or not they are important enough to also get published, but the fact that this PN article has probably raised his chance of getting paid from 0 to above 0 does make it a little messy.

Donnie Peters answered the question to why he chose not to publish the Deeb story in his conversation with Joey. He basically said he knows this type of story is a slippery slope and was basically publishing this as a one time piece to get a bigger conversation started. He clearly holds Galfond as one of the most trustworthy and upstanding people in poker, so he chose him for the one article. He says if Deeb came to him about a month earlier him and his story maybe could have been the one article to get the conversation started. I don't agree or disagree with that, but that seemed to be his thoughts. He talks about all that starting about 7:30 in his podcast with Joey.

Ah ok, for some reason I thought it wouldn't have been covered since, at that time, Deeb hadn't outed the scammers yet.

I think that's a fair position to hold. Would have preferred Galfond just took the step of blogging/tweeting about it and encourage others to do the same... followed by a "letter from the editor" saying we support the blog but won't get into the business of reporting other people.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Joey, when are you gonna upload the newer podcasts to iTunes? Last one uploaded was Jeans I believe

It's inaccurate for Remko to argue (multiple times) that Jason isn't helping make poker better by being negative and trolling on Twitter. You don't need to look any further than the podcast he did last year with Joey where he eloquently described how PokerStars is going to f00k all the low stakes and mid stakes pros in the ass. I can't think of anything in poker media in 2015 that brought more truth than that appearance did. I'm surprised he wasn't nominated for an American Poker Award.

When can we stop to hear that story ?

So much negativism lately, this is not GTO.

To lend 250K to a broke player, without contract, is freaking stupid anyway. And these things should remain private.

Do not wash your dirty laundry in public.

cheers buddy, i do deserve an american poker award

Sure, Remko does have a point on the negativity backlash on unpaid poker loans in which will not make poker evolve in a more positive light. But who is he kidding, every aspect of life has bad business dealings. Enter the real world.

His monthly income revolves around poker and so he wants/needs it to be centered around guys that graduate/drop out from college, choose poker as a living, and make boat loads of money. Without all the ups, downs, peaks, and valleys of the gambling world.

this is why its so easy to scam poker players, basically worst case for a scammer is you repay later. Its always shocked me how accepted cheaters/scammers/those with sick amts of debt are accepted in the community.

sure, outing people may lower the already slim chance of getting repaid, but may deter people from scamming in the future if theres actually a negative outcome for them

World poker award imo

I think lending a problem gambler money for your own self-interests is pretty scummy. The intent in all these cases wasn't to lend a helping hand it was to extract maximum value and not caring about how it could/would impact the persons life. Deeb getting to decide that he finds first guy guilty by association and not pay is also an interesting side note. Not sure what the answer is here but hoping to take advantage of a problem gambler for significant money that could effect their overall life in order to exploit an edge and take advantage of someone in a bad state of mind is not how poker players should be perceived.

requesting guest Privateworld. the real HS reg problems we deserve.

Remko made Jmo look like a prissy selfish complainer.