+1

Props for apologising yo the bloke u tweeted. Advice, never mention anything about it again, it will go away.

UB
Only Q i have, Y did u join UB when ( i assume) you had other options?

Stop blaming the victim. Jon is guilty of nothing other than criticizing the practices of a business. Joe had no reason to attack Jon personally, publicly or privately, and he had to know anything he said to Jon was for public consumption, esp., anything that could be interpreted as a threat.

It just makes it mote clear how corrupt UB still is. If the leadership at UB wasn't involved in the cover up, they would be completely open and honest since this ongoing drama is tremendously damaging to their business. They wouldn't damage innocent majority interests to protect corrupt minority shareholders or former employees. They wouldn't have gotten caught posting shill messages on two plus two. They wouldn't have allowed Joe to threaten anyone, and they would have demanded he post a genuine apology immediately, not the clearly insincere one he started this thread with.

It's pretty clear UB is still run by the old AP crooks.

You can't be sue for "blackmail" since it is a crime and not a civil wrong. Also, don't threaten Joe with any criminal or civil action since your threat of such action has legal consequences. Stick to poker, that is what these forums (and the posters) are good at. Leave the law to us lawyers.

the whole thing feels like BS to help the need for more attention. Cant earn there tv time so they make believe it on the internetz. pathetic.

I like everything you wrote, Ray. However, it is this point -- which has resurfaced in this thread several times -- that continues to pique my interest.

a) what is the likelihood that this might happen?
b) who should compose the panel of "authorized" questioners?

I feel like one of the last people who still likes Joe Sebok but even I get pretty frustrated by his inability to provide information in his recent podcast interviews (e.g. The Rabbit Hunt on Cardrunners) or in this thread. Enough with the "I don't know" answers from someone who is by his own admission under-informed about the scandal. It's about time Leggett stepped up and faced the poker nation in an interactive manner -- that is, one that allows for follow-up. So far, the closest he has come is by fielding listener-submitted questions. We know what happens: Leggett dodges these shots in a manner that would impress Patches O'Houlihan, and we are left unsatisfied.

MJ and Adam had Leggett as an interview guest on the PokerCast during the 2008 WSOP. Adam indicated that he'd like to bring him back as a follow-up. With the amount of information that has come to light in the two-plus years since this appearance, combined with an abundance of new questions, perhaps this site's own podcast could provide such an arena for such a conversation.

Does ANYONE here play poker anymore, and know how to read people by their actions.

He's in a no win situation because he's not genuine.

If he was genuine he never would have threatened Jon in the first place. If he genuinely didn't intend to threaten Jon, he would have quickly apologized for the mistake because he would have felt horrified about how Jon and hs GF must have felt because of the miscommunication. He would not have behaved like a self centered jerk, trying to deflect by acting as if he was the aggrieved party.

If he was genuine his apology would have been sincere, and not quickly followed by a public threat against his victim.

Joe is in a tough spot because he apparently needs his UB paycheck so badly that he can't be unbiased or honest about them. It's why he felt compelled to lash out at Jon, why he's been so angry that Jon publicized his attempt to help UB keep covering up it's closeted skeletons.

He's in a no win situation because he sold his honesty and credibility for a buck, and has to be a UB puppet as long as he still wants those checks.

Its not a full 3rd party audit but its a start...

http://www.pokerroad.com/forums/open...bets-dept.html

thats quite wordy for a definition.

an example of a real one would be:
shill (shl) Slang
n.
One who poses as a satisfied customer or an enthusiastic gambler to dupe bystanders into participating in a swindle.

I'm not trying to twist his posts in any kind of positive manner, I'm not even a fan of him and I think he's obviously lying about certain things in regard to UB. Personally I hope the company burns down and he can never get work as a poker pro for any other company. I agree with you saying that he is implying that UB is hiding skeletons.

But logical pretzels, twisting, embarassing, lol dude. I'm not even gonna bother explaining why I don't think that post towards Aguiar ITT necessarily has to be a thread, because these arguments always go in circles. I wasn't twisting any logic in my post though, lol. Instead of thinking up of elaborate ways to tell me I'm wrong you could actually back up theese ridiculous sentences you write. Whatever though, go to hell Sebok.

and he will forever be in his little bubble about UB. Not sure if he has any friends who really hate his decision about being with that company, or if he slowly got rid of them over time. Here is some fluffy tweets that he's been getting from people and thanking those people after his rough time in the forums.

from @merchdawg Joe, you have to learn that some people will never be happy, they only want to tear you down. Keep your head up.

from @DanFleyshman (owner of Victory Poker) It was written very well and from the heart as always. Stick to what you believe in. "You can't please everybody" #fact
@joe sebok tyty, sir. honesty gets a beatdown sometimes. would like to please the pack. oh well, for now.

from lara miller
@joesebok is so loved by so many people that actually know him.
@TrishelleC @Lara_Miller awwww, you guys are too sweet to me.


Sorry this guy has no business ever dealing with this issue, just take your little ball and go home Joe.

Uhhh guys I think Joe left the building a long time ago....

joe's twitter:

@"honesty gets a beatdown sometimes. would like to please the pack. oh well, for now."

honest about what? you don't know anything.

people are upset because you over-promised - you were gonna be SEBOK THE SLEUTH.

i think you even over-promised YOURSELF cuz you knew the money was dirty.

don't get why shaniac is acting like joe is doing 2p2 a favor with this thread. ub has no credibility. joe is in the awkward position of representing that company. joe doesn't seem to have much to say about the scandal. there's really nothing to discuss.

all i learned itt is that sebok had actual info he considered damaging about Jon's gf and that he doesn't understand the definition of blackmail

Im posting my response from just reading the OP and no responses yet but that post reads to me as someone who really has no idea what's really going on behind the scenes. Just someone that's on the endorsement payroll who wants to believe the fake smiles and handshakes are legitimate in order to self-rationalize collecting the paychecks.

those follow up tweets are awesome.

i work for a corrupt company that steals from its customers and i threaten people who say bad things about them, but hey, you can't please everybody.

Jon just comes off as attention whoring the whole way imo.

Uhh not really. First time around sure, but now Jon is the one who keeps bringing it up. As joe said, he mentioned the GF in a PM and then in this thread simply apologized without mentioning it. Jon bringing it to attention and Joe basically saying "uhh are you sure you want that topic discussed here?" is not a threat in that context the 2nd time, the first time I could see how though.

This was my read as well. Basically trying to use 2p2's hate for JS/UB as a front in an attempt to get some notoriety and seem important. Instead just looking like a bitch crybaby. Oops.

You going to keep ignoring Mooks post?

Yeah, we thought so.

1. Public disclosure of private facts is a tort. Depending on what the information is, Joe could be sued if he released the information.

2. The poster you were trying to take a dump on didn't threaten to sue Joe or have Joe charged; he only said that Joe could be sued. And he was right; Joe could be sued (although he may still win if it came to that).

Leave the lawyering to better lawyers.

This exact idea came up back when Cereus asked to have reps post here, the consensus was they could have reps post if they answered a collection of questions.
And then of course the whole thing with reps fell apart, and the UB shills were outed.

It's sorta beside the point, but you really are misusing the word. A shill pretends not to be associated with the business they are promoting. That's the defining characteristic of a shill.

This is such a terrible post. He pretty much made an uncatergorical apology for the message he sent FE. FE comes into this thread and says,

I notice you still refuse to address the inclusion of my girlfriend in this all, it's a huge point to just ignore in such a lengthy thought out response.

to which Joe responds with "jon, i am perfectly happy to let everyone know why i brought up your gf. that's your call. you know exactly why i mentioned her. that's your business. also wanted to add that by posting our private message publicly that you have brought her into this publicly, not i. i feel very badly for any stress that it may have caused her. i would probably think if you want to keep pushing it."

And then later this, "ok, this is the last aguiar thing i'll address. i wasn't threatening to disclose anything. my wording was very poor and i apologized for that. yes, i was referencing something specific. no, it wasn't blackmail. i was saying "hey man, we all have stuff that we don't want talked about, like x" as i said, my wording was beyond terribad."

So really, he was perfectly clear about the "blackmail situation "in this thread. He apologized, FE brought up his GF and tryed to get some sort of seperate apology somehow thinking that Joe saying his inital DM was out of line didn't encompass that. The whole thing about his GF literally never comes to light if he makes any effort to handle the situation with Joe. But the first thing he does is run and post it on a public forum and then starts screaming bloody murder. (And I do think it was out of line, I am not defending it but it's shocking how few people have the balls to say FE handled this situation terribly as well) And I guarentee plenty of people that there would be a ton less support for the way FE has handled this whole ordeal if people didn't already have a grudge about UB/seebok for things completley unrelated to this matter. I am one of those people, but I have enough disdain for UB that I didn't care enough to comment in the fist thread.

I'm not going to read the essay you write in reponse to this, but people taking such one sided views on this issue and spewing such nonsense need to be called out. We should all be focusing on UB cheating and not some exerpt from a private message not relating to poker that was posted on a public forum by the recipient. The crazy thing is I don't even like or give a **** about Joe Sebok. His was obviously FOS with regard to getting to the bottom of all the UB stuff. Everyone taking a paycheck from them who doesn't go out of their way to publicly defend them probably has close to as much information as he has on the matter. They get a pass because they never claimed they were going to help in the way he did, which ended up being not true. But any UB pro is as guilty as Seebok is when it comes to taking a paycheck to support a company with an incredibly ****ed up history. Seebok is not alone in this.

this should be pretty obv to everyone id hope.

Ggbman just nailed it. Thanks for typing what some of the rest of us are thinking who don't feel like typing all that out.

He was using this as leverage imo for a more favorable/sympathetic 2p2 reaction. But if we want to make this thread even more interesting, FE already technically gave JS the go-ahead to release the information in the last thread he made. So let's hear it Joe.

This post has to rank among the best I've ever seen by somebody with less than 100 posts.

As far as OP, the first sentence in his post was solid. He should have stopped there, because it went downhill fast afterwards. As far as his responses since then, they have basically been a steadily worsening train wreck.

I'm done with Sebok, and any hope UB ever had of getting me back is gone. Enjoy!

He hasn't said anything, so like you said he COULD be sued if he released the info...he could also be sued if he crashed the guy's car...another thing Joe has not done.

As for your statement that he could be sued but still win, nice try with the old "you can be sued for anything" line. I will go heads up for rolls in the courtroom anytime...at the poker table, well, you would win there for sure.