Actually it doesnt seem to matter if you are berating some random player or FTP itself, you are still abundantly arrogant and self centered while doing so. When you say things like "yadayadayada me and dire are so hot cause we can read soulz ldo" i could care less what other contributions you've made itt. at that point i just want you to *****... kthxbye

+1

Makes me happy the douche lost that 10 grand prop bet last month.

yoyo is just pissed over the rake back stuff... get over it or gtfo.

So Sober switched the pokersite and -forum, huh?

LOL at yoyo thinking he "won" the thread somehow.

Like that was ever the point.

But congrats to the d-bag. It's probably the only pleasure he gets in life.

Agreed. I thought it was irrelevant, and I suppose I couldn't have been more wrong.

It'd be nice if Sean would confirm that the remainder of the email was posted in its entirety, and confirm the first name on the other account that is now associated with my computer.

Funny how Sean can drop in with a silly 'gotcha' and answer questions about IM software, but still not word one about what software I supposedly used. I guess FT has been monitoring the thread very closely, waiting for me to trip up in some way so they could turn this into a big cluster****. Congrats.

Oh just give it up. They were waiting to trip you up in some way?

Man, you blatantly edited an email to avoid mentioning information that shows you're already more than happy to violate FTP's terms and conditions in multiple instances, including immediately after you were banned. You didn't miss a stride before starting to multiaccount and posting this thread. FTP pointing that out is slightly different than just waiting for you to trip up.

And even if it wasn't as critical of information as it was - that's not for you to decide. You don't get to hand select what you want to put out there when you entitle a thread "full disclosure". This isn't "full disclosure - unless I don't want you to know about it."

What a joke.

Don't turn your mistake on FTP. It's not like you omitted a small detail, that can happen. But you intentionally deleted an obviously relevant portion of an email from FTP. So the response from everyone should not surprise you.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think you did anything that terrible and FTP has alot of work to do when it comes to CS, but posters who get their accounts frozen need to be open and honest otherwise it eventually comes back to bite them in the ass.

Unfortunately, most of the time they are not honest, because if they were they wouldn't have had their accounts frozen in the first place.

No, actually the only thing this e-mail proves is the willingness of the OP to violate FTP's terms and conditions only after he was banned, not including after he was banned.

Which, while not really praiseworthy and certainly not something to omit, is not really that condemnable from someone who feels he's just been cheated by the pokerroom he's been playing so long in.

Note that the main charge in question was using forbidden programs, not multiaccounting. Saying that having done one counts as serious proof towards having done the other because both are violations of TOS is like saying littering in the park suggests someone as a likely suspect for shoplifting because both are punishable offenses.

FTP has proof that he used forbidden software on multiple accounts. OP is a cheat and still trying to pull wool over everyone's eyes. Stop trying to defend him, he blew it and successfully used us to get his money back.

But seeing how you just joined this site and are defending him so vigorously I am sure you know that.

Yes, we've been over that already. What has been disclosed only shows that FTP has proof of him multiaccounting and sheds no light whatsoever on their proof of him using forbidden programs. Also, the fact that they allowed him to withdraw his money suggests they actually only have proof of him multiaccounting, which is enough of a cover for them to not admit they falsely accused him in the first place (since no proof has been shown that he had multiaccounted before the ban).

Your conclusion being? No, wait, let me draw it for you: I'm probably the OP himself or one of his friends under a new account, the 20+ posts I've made so far are a cover so that I can now jump in here and defend him when he's already put himself in a hopeless situation. Yes, that's probably it. You're probably as good at drawing conclusions about OP's fault as you are regarding my identity (hint hint: I've used this nickname as my internet identity for quite a long time and 1 minute with Your Friend Mr Google would verify your assumptions). You're probably just as willing to admit your mistake in both cases, too.

They clearly state they identified prohibited software on each of the accounts OP and "OP's cousin that was conveniently omitted" played on. They are not just accusing him of multi-accounting here. They are claiming they have proof of prohibited software, and that is the reason for the ban, not multi-accounting. And I completely believe FTP on this one, I just wish they would have confiscated his roll.

They have proof that "somebody" used his computer after Sober's original account had been banned but they still have no proof that he has used a prohibited software, and they still ban him for that reason and not multiaccounting... I'm aware they claim having a proof, but where is it ?

Obviously, what FTP stated is never a question here. The question is whether their banning reasons are the same as those stated or not. We have their word vs. the OP's word and the fact that they did not confiscate his funds even though they knew of the second account from the start. This fact basically suggests that the only thing they had real proof of was the multiaccounting issue.

What I am saying is that the sole fact of the OP multiaccounting does not really make the assertion of him using prohibited software more likely. It does make that more likely only if you're judging the person and not the arguments brought forth, which you shouldn't be doing in the first place. Actually, FTP's arguments put forth in this topic only convince me more of his innocence to the primary charges, since FTP did not present any counterarguments, responding instead with a very convincing use of the association fallacy. While this does put the OP in a bad light, it is hardly proof at all. I don't put any faith (positive or negative) in FTP's claim at all, but the OP has provided us with arguments, while FTP only provided us with bits and pieces that are arguments only under fallacious reasoning (appeal to authority aka "they banned him, so they had to have a reason" and guilt by association aka "he multiaccounted, so he had to use prohibited software as well").

How would you know if im using AIM/MSN to cheat as opposed to having a normal conversation with someone? Are you are able to read messages from IMs?

mission accomplished

yes

nah

Absolutely.

yes. they can also monitor what sites you visit, emails you write, your desktop background, etc. (only when the poker client is open). so just behave when you play and nothing happens.

oh and ilintar HAS to be leveling, right??

Sober's account was closed for using prohibited software, not multi accounting. It has not been demonstrated one way or the other whether he in fact used prohibited software.

It is very difficult to defend yourself against such charges since FTP does not say what software is prohibited, or even give a list of examples of known prohibited (or acceptable) software. Their pages only give vague descriptions, which depending on how they are interpreted could apply to almost any poker software, even PT. FTP does not in any of their emails to Sober even hint at the nature of the prohibited software he allegedly used. Was it bot software? Software that shared hole card information? An odds calculator? Something else?

Guilty or innocent, every player should have a chance to defend himself against such charges. How do you defend yourself when you don't know what you allegedly did?

Sober screwed up not disclosing his multiple accounts, but this was not why he banned.

Regardless of OP's guilt or innonce, FTP handled this poorly.

Seriously do you really think anyone believes that you weren't playing on his account?

Not. I generally say what I think. If you see any flaws in my argumentation, feel free to point it out, I'll be glad to answer them for you, after all, that's the whole goal of those internet debates, isn't it? :>

After receiving the final email from FTP, how was anything posted here "irrelevant/dangerous" to your (alleged) cousin?

Dude seriously? Go read your 2nd to last post in this thread. The 2nd paragraph of that is some of the most ridiculous **** ive seen on these boards. And considering grannymae constantly posts here, thats hard to do.

If you REALLY still need help seeing how and where you are making bad points in that paragraph, I GUESS I could do one of those fancy "multi quote" posts I'm always hearing about. But if you need me to do that for you, there is almost no point.