Agree with this.

Eh... I can't agree with your reasoning. When she was mostly dealing with anonymous sources, her anonymity was more of an issue in my view.

Having the article signed with Jane Doe instead of Diamond Flush doesn't give us any more information.

I was looking forward to reading that interview but I am also looking forward to read whatever it is she is gonna publish on this matter. I am thankful that we have someone who volunteers to put that much work into it and who managed to gain a great reputation with the way she handled things.

I don't care what her name is and she obviously doesn't care to share. How about you guys respect that and stop being so creepy.

lol i no TonG G owns pokernews.com ,

"During this next week, I will be publishing my own articles outlining my take on what was said and not said. Readers will see some of the questions that I would have asked, what I believe Howard would have answered (based on his already on the record answers) and what the truth really is."


Definitely looking forward to these articles anyways.

I'm going to go on record and disagree with Mike on this one and say that in the surveillance-based totalitarian state that is forming around us, anonymity is going to be a precious commodity. If you have it, why give it up for no reason?

Her articles and interviews either stand or fail on their own merits.

Something else to think about - a public figure is known by the name attached to his/her public persona, but this is not always the same as their "real" name. We may know person X as Vladimir Lenin - what difference does it make that that wasn't his real name. Similarly, who would care if Che Guevara's real name turned out to be Mike Johnson.

I'm not knocking the massively important role she has played in all of this, she has been beyond invaluable. i just personally believe that once you start interviewing the biggest names involved in the story on the record you have officially made the transition from info-leaking blogger to media member. I actually can't think of any other media person who interviews major news personalities for public consumption anonymously.

Re: Pot committed - that's the name of a blog, not a person. It's well known that blog is written by kristen Bihr aka Change 100. She used her real name when she appeared on our show.

He's clearly about to break down. We're in like the 50th minute of this Law & Order episode.

huge fan of mike as well but i agree with this

I read her blog for a long time and only knew her as change100. Only when she was interviewed on your show did I learn her real name - if I recall, it came out because she did well in one of the ladies' tourneys and she was "outed" by some pokernews reporters.

But I ask the question: how does knowing her real name change the way I view her blog?

Remember, Mike, contrarians are usually right.

I got a feeling some huge and unexpected truths will be revealed in Diamonds coming articles. Can't wait!

He prob. decided to quit talking when he realised people weren't buying into his b.s.
Perhaps the fact that Doyle so readily went for it, he thought everyone else would do the same.

Of this there is no debate.

I don't know any 'media persons' but I would guess they usually do that for a living and having their name out there and connected to big stories is their way of bringing food on the table.
I don't believe that DF does this for a living. Only because she build her reputation well enough that 'big names' are (somewhat) willing to talk to her, doesn't make her a professional journalist.

But even if she was a professional journalist: Just because something is unusual, doesn't make it wrong.

I also disagree that she does it anonymously. She uses a pseudonym. That pseudonym became a brand already. People in the poker community are interested in what 'Diamond Flush' has to say. They don't necessarily care what 'Jane Doe' has to say.

I understand that you are not used to people preferring to not let everybody know their real name, but I doubt that justifies as a reason to demand it of her.

I guess i 'm just old school.

Has DF explained her reasoning for being anonymous?

Has it been well known for a while? I've had her blog in my reader for a while but didn't see her real name until she won the PCA ladies event.

But then again you and Adam were pretty much anonymous to me until the Lederer interview even though I've listened to the Pokercast a few times. Can you throw out your names and the guest's info every once in a while for those of us that are at times scatterbrained or multitasking?

When he/she/it steals 350 million from the poker community maybe we can start caring about the real name.

Until then, there is the issue of these thieving scumbag full tilt shareholders that got paid dividends out of players deposits when the company was insolvent and the horrible truth that, save the board, they are probably gonna get away with it.

So ya, pretty much **** her real name. I don't care.

Careful Mike, that's one of Edog's excuses.

But seriously, I don't think that DF's anonymity is that important. What's important is that she has proven herself to have good information and a detailed understanding of the FTP debacle.

I hope that when they come out, people are talking about the content of the articles rather than whether we need to know her real name or not.

I wasn't sure about even posting in this thread, but what the heck, why not. My anonymity is not for any nefarious reasons. I am not a professional poker player, I had no tie to FTP other than being a recreational micro stakes player. I was never employed by them or any entity related to them, or anyone else in the industry. Before I started on this journey, I never met any of the principles involved (probably have been in the same live poker room as some tho), never met any of the sources, I started from scratch just like anyone else that happens to read the forum might. Journalism is not my chosen profession, I do not write the articles to put food on the table. I accept donations, with much gratitude, just to keep the site going. I have borrowed money and also received donations from some people that understand how expensive the travel etc can be related to getting to the bottom of this story. I even offered to fly to Las Vegas with a camerman and a soundman to do the interview with Howard. No I can't afford it, but I would have sold blood to do it, because it's that important.
I've said this before, but I suppose it's worth repeating. There are hundreds of reasons why forums etc offer anonymity through screennames and why people take them up on it. Most of those reasons are totally legit, like mine. My professional life has always been in an area far removed from poker, and I prefer that those two don't have to meet.
I never pretended that Diamond was my real name. Heck, plenty of writers sign their pieces with nom de plumes, and you don't really know that that is there real name either. You just assume it is because it sounds "normal". I could have started signing my pieces with the name Mary Peterson and you would have accepted that. (No that is not my name, just making a point).
When I meet a principal or a source in person, if they insist on knowing my name, I tell them. I just don't know what else to say. If you have found anything that I have ever written or said on a radio or podcast to be not true, please let me know. It's not the name that's important, it's the content.

As for the content in these next pieces, let me be clear...I have spent a year digging into this whole debacle. Yes there are things I know that others don't, because I worked hard building that trust it took to get there. I protect names of sources and they do the same. As for the previous interviews, I think Pokernews and the Pokercast both did a good job. Anyone can tell that Matt Parvis spent a lot of time getting up to speed on the situation but he was limited in using mostly public information. Mike and Adam asked all the questions that people wanted to ask, I think they were great. I even wished them luck privately before they interviewed. I didn't see it as competition, I knew mine would be different. Why? Because I know the answers to all (or most) of my questions before I ask them.

The articles will be with that in mind. It's not sour grapes, or any cheap shots, it's just the right time, the time when the truth about what happened matters, and anything else should not be allowed to stand unchallenged.

You can read or not. I hope you do.

Fwiw, no need to use that F5 button for the articles, first one will probably be afternoon Monday sometime and then sporadically during the week. Will tweet.

wow

Just made a small donation. How much did you borrow DiamondFlush?

I find DiamondFlush's existence to be one of the more bizarre pieces in this saga. Anyways, I'm looking forward to reading. I'm skeptical though because there wasn't anything particularly groundbreaking in her Andy Block interview.

DiamondFlush is the Isildur of poker insiders.