Sillysal -

I am flattered that lil' ol' me could bring you out of the woodwork again, after you said your posting days were through.

Sorry for assuming you were 40. I know you're at least a few years older than me, and I'm getting close to 36. Perhaps I could get the mods to change the words of my previous post from saying "40" to "pushing 40". Perhaps that would leave you feeling more satisfied with my description.

All age references aside, please answer the following important questions for us:

1) Have you at any time used ANY other account on Full Tilt other than pokergirl z? If so, which account(s)?

2) Have you ever met BeatMe1/redgar3? Do you mind if the mods here check on your IP and see how it matches up with that of BeatMe1's from her earlier posts here?

3) Did you know up until now that BeatMe1/redgar3 had the same first name as you?

4) Please tell us exactly what Full Tilt has accused you of, and what evidence they have presented.

Thank you.

Sorry if I am playing devils advocate here but your posts look like they are carefully crafted statements. You seemed to be prepared for the accusations leveled against you.

I am sorry but, I just don't understand why Full Tilt would say you are using a bot if you were not. What would they have to gain? All they have gotten from this is bad PR.

... as she should.

If FTP are wrong, they are probably not deliberately wrong.

Sites have made mistakes in the past, and will certainly make mistakes in the future.

Instead of tearing this guy down, how about being productive, and using your superior legal skills to outline the process under which you think an American could learn who to sue, file suit, overcome the choice of forum clause in the EULA, then, assuming prevailing on the merits, recover in Alderney?

Cheers, Carl.

[/quote]

Carl,



Scrape a retainer together and I would be glad to do the research. You have already done half the battle. Local counsel in Alderney could be found. They are under British control...we are not going into North Korea here. I would suggest contacting the Alderney Gambling Control Commission. The CEO, Andre Wilsenach, would be a good person to start with I would bet.

Perhaps one could even go to your local state representative of that commission who will most likely be a gaming attorney- every U.S. state seems to have a gaming attorney that is a member of the commission.

This link is gratis for any aggreived FT player out there:
http://www.gamblingcontrol.org/index.php?page=5


Scoop of Chocolate, Scoop of Vanilla, don't waste my time.

Sounds like Carl is still in law school and has never practiced. Not everything is the mountain they make it out to be in those big maroon books. If there is a whole commission for such things and there are attorneys in firms all over the country who are members of this little commission in the channel islands but there has never been any cases filed, well then I stand corrected.

I can think of quite a few reasons.

Again with ad hominen arguments - my status is irrelevant to the discussion. I never indicated whether I had any legal training or experience. But, counsel, your attempt to change the argument is pretty transparent.

One claim in your post I took issue was for criticizing someone who said there were no successful cases of individuals suing in U.S. courts to recover for seized funds. I asked you to back up your criticism, and provide proof he was wrong. You sidestepped that question, and have not provided one example of successful litigation. I'd say the brain trust on 2p2 is pretty vast - if there were any cases in support of your position, someone here would likely know about it.

I also took issue with your claim that U.S. courts could successfully exercise long-arm jurisdiction against a foreign corporation, particularly when the EULA has a choice of forum provision in it. Again, instead of addressing that issue (i.e. backing up your assertion that U.S. courts provided a meaningful remedy), you redefined the issue by suggesting other ways people could go after FTP, such as complaining to a foreign gaming commission.

While foreign commissions may provide a remedy, that begs the question of whether U.S. courts can do so. An intriguing idea, worthy of discussion, but not responsive to specific questions I posed.

I'm on your side - I'd love to have domestic judicial remedies against foreign poker sites, hence I think that regulation may be the only practical solution. But if you claim courts can already do it, I think that you should be prepared to substantiate your arguments w/o requesting a retainer.

Cheers, Carl.

Hey SillySal,

PoorLawyer did raise a valid point - the Alderney Gambling Control Commission may provide a meaningful remedy, assuming they actually license Full Tilt Poker, or otherwise govern entities based out of Alderney. The law establishing the commission gives it real powers, and the commission itself has pretty broad authority to investigate licensees. See the Alderney EGambling Regulations for more information, particularly sections 333 onwards.

However, I note that FTP has the Kahnawake Gaming Commission license emblem displayed on each page, with no mention of Alderney. As we're seeing with the Absolute Poker cheating scandal, the KGC may be more of a licensing entity on paper than in reality.

Cheers, Carl.

I can't say i've read the full tilt contract you agree to before playing there and, as such, did not know there was a choice of forum clause.

Regardless, the original post I responded to was "[a]n attorney would be useless here." This statement by DD had no basis and still does not. It had nothing to do with obtaining a foreign judgment against an international corporation with a forum selection clause. One could certainly argue that the forum clause is an adhesion contract, but that is so off the point of this thread that it is not worth discussing. Either way I talk enough law during the day and am done.

SillySal. I think you are innocent until you are PROVEN guilty.

Amateur lawyers, come on. Sue them in a California court. That choice of forum provision is unenforceable. Sillysal lives in California. California law includes the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, which makes unlawful unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices undertaken by any person in a transaction intended to result or which results in the sale or lease of goods or services. It further includes:
1751. Any waiver by a consumer of the provisions of this title is contrary to public policy and shall be unenforceable and void.
and makes unlawful:

(19) Inserting an unconscionable provision in the contract.

Hmm, think any provisions in FT's ELUA are unconscionable? How about all FT decisions shall be final?

This has been applied by the California Court of Appeals to render unenforceable a choice of forum clause and choice of law clause in an AOL contract. The court stated:

"Certainly, the CLRA provides remedial protections at least as important as those under the Corporate Securities Law of 1968. Therefore, by parity of reasoning, enforcement of AOL's forum selection clause, which is also accompanied by a choice of law provision favoring Virginia, would necessitate a waiver of the statutory remedies of the CLRA, in violation of that law's anti-waiver provision (Civ. Code, 1751) and California public policy. For this reason alone, we affirm the trial court's ruling."

So, if this foreign jurisdiction has no consumer protection statute offering the protections of the CLRA (which I don't know but find EXTREMELY unlikely), then the provisions are very likely to be unenforceable. And for those who think long arm jurisdiction can't apply, tell that to Bodog, they have something like a $400 million judgment against them by I believe a Nevada court, they tried not showing up, got default judgment, tried to argue they were not served, lost on that too.

I can’t comment on the specifics of this investigation now but I have answered every question that Full Tilt and Mike Haven have asked me.

Yes, redgar3 was at the 2006 WSOP Pokerroom.com party in Las Vegas. I was also at the party.

No, they can check my IP and report anything they find.


Redgar3’s name was Lisa … My name is not Lisa. That can be verified by numerous sources.


I am accused of being a bot. The only evidence I have seen is the same information that everyone else has seen posted on 2+2 by Mike Haven i.e stats that are similar to other players.

[/quote] I am accused of being a bot. The only evidence I have seen is the same information that everyone else has seen posted on 2+2 by Mike Haven i.e stats that are similar to other players.

[/quote]

If this is all they got, FTP is a joke. Come on FTP show us something you clowns. How about Mike Haven, where are his comments on the so-called evidence??? If I was a california attorney, I would file suit against these clowns pro-bono.

WOW.

Seriously, the only evidence presented has been that your play is similar to that of other winners? That and it also was only delivered through the indirect medium of 2p2, not to you directly prior ro public disclosure?

Just WOW.

Let us also not forget, You were not accused of being a bot. This was your judgment.

You were accused of something which may take weeks to research, IIRC recipient of fraudulent funds / chip dumping.

There is no way it takes weeks of frozen account to prove use of botting software... it is pretty much an instant hit, no?

Am I mis-remembering the older posts here?

EDIT:

IIRC Mike's last post indicated there was erronious data in the spreadsheet, which he pointed out to FTP, and thus has yet to be elaborated on

I still think something is fishy here.

Mike has been extremely quiet about the matter.

Dave, I agree. i mentioned this earlier in the thread. FTPSean mentioned that the investigation took so long because of the time it takes for credit card companies etc to respond to FTP's requests, but if this was botting or illegal software why was the account frozen for over 3 weeks when thy should have had all the information they needed to hand?????

Also if it is true that all the evidence FTP has is the stats, thats pretty bad....

TY, that is what I thought I remembered. Something along the lines of an official response saying "sorry it takes so long, we need to wait for responses from our payment processors etc."

Regarding use of botting, it should be more like "Our automated systems, later confirmed our software experts, have observed your use of illegal software on numerous occasions. your account is terminated. goodbye"

EDIT: Like the famous TeddyFBI's Mom case on Stars.

Something is not right here

I don't believe she actually said the part in bold. Maybe FTP or Mike also gave it to her right before they posted it.

Yeah, that is what I am questioning... Sal's response could be taken either way... If it is the way I posed (and you bolded), it is horrific. If she was given advance notice, not so horrible, but still ridiculous to consider conclusive proof imo.

I seek clarification on both these points, therefore the questions.

EDIT: To clarify what I am really pondering... here we have a site that openly permits (encourages?) datamining, yet will ban an account and seize the funds based on nothing more that playing the same way?

It's possible that FTP tried to trace the financial lifeline for each of the suspected accounts back to it's source. That's a possible way to confirm that "unrelated" bot accounts are actually closely connected to each other. That could involved banks, e-wallets, etc, and it could take time.

Certainly if I were FTP I would be looking into this. Even if I was already 100% certain of guilt the information might help me prevent them from sneaking back under new identities.

It's pretty obvious that the situation is in flux although we have little idea what is happening. I wouldn't expect Mike to express a public opinion right now. I'm sure we will hear from him when the current process is concluded.

Good point, well made.

Quite so, but why keep the account locked in the interim? 100% guilty bot = account closed, study the path of the money after closure so as to spot the new bot accounts / other potential bots... why keep the account in the frozen middleground if there is already reason to close it?

Another good point..

Does nobody else think this is a little odd?

Very odd.

Come on, Sal.

In your 40 years on this earth, haven't you come to realize that statements like this just make you look more guilty?

I am tending to believe a lot of the other stuff you're saying, but I think it's now fairly clear that you WERE using other accounts on Full Tilt.

There's no point to hide it at this point. FTP would have this evidence already from IP address examination.

Look, if your only guilt involves multi-accounting, I'll be the first one to stand in your corner and call for Full Tilt to reinstate you -- or at the very least, return your money. After all, they seem to have no problem letting Patrik Antonius and David Benyamine switch names without telling everyone.

However, I am getting a bit concerned that you're not telling us everything.

If you had really only used pokergirl z to play on Full Tilt, I believe you would have said so, rather than giving me that evasive-sounding answer above. Why were you multi-accounting? What were the names of those other accounts? Were those accounts ever closed or suspected of wrongdoing prior to pokergirl z being closed?

You came to 2+2 for help. You posted your story in order to make us understand Full Tilt's heavy-handed tactics against a supposedly innocent player. Now you have to be forthcoming with us if you want anyone to be in your corner. If a simple question about multi-accounting trips you up, I'm not sure what else might be hiding underneath the bed.