Quote:
Originally Posted by PayDatBotItsMeoney
3.Though possibly a little understated I am not in defense of either. My point (albeit possibly confusing) is A. There are NO facts, just speculation. People gravitated to ludicrous ideas of bone hats and stuff without looking at the plausible methods used by SLP...aka Discord channel for prod to talk with dealers. In addition still innocent people have gone publicly and demonized these people without any solid facts.
[snip]
At risk of sounding nitpicky, the bolded is incorrect: there are plenty of facts. The question is whether or not these facts mean what the accusers say they mean.
For example, Gumpnstein's observation of Postle putting his phone into his crotch during the July 1, 2018 stream: that action is a fact. Whether or not Postle used that phone to gain information – that's what is left to be determined.
Postle going all-in in a three-way pot with 54 offsuit? Fact. A noticeable bulge in that white baseball cap? Fact.
Postle going all-in in a three-way pot with 54 offsuit because he knew it would be an equity favorite? The noticeable bulge in that white baseball cap must be a bone conduction hearing aid used to gain hole card information? Agreed, now we're speculating, and doing so twice in the second example (one guess as to what caused the bulge, the second guess as to what such a device is used for).
How damning vs. meaningless are these facts? Well, that's the nature of circumstantial evidence*. You've said many times that you want proof. Ultimately, that's what proof is: the combination of evidence and the conclusions that can be made from that evidence. The larger the body of facts, the more mere speculation becomes conclusion.
Now, with that all said...
Quote:
Tablet is to connect to wifi and to bluetooth headset that dealer wears. What app are they using for this? Discord.
Out of curiosity, is
this bolded statement a fact or speculation? And if it's a fact, how do you know that? And if it's true, how was Discord used in the alleged cheating and/or how does it exonerate Postle?
(By the way, please don't merely guess when answering my questions. I also prefer proof.)
*Don't get me started on the number of people saying some version of "you only have circumstantial evidence." But that's a rant for another time.