I like Ike's thread idea much much better than a live audio interview.

Couple mods, Mason, Haley, Mook...would make it impossible for them to get away with any stonewalling without making it completely obvious that they didn't even try and weren't going into this with any degree of honesty.

Live audio, it'd be too easy to politicon around everything and say "ok we did it, see? Nothing here, move on, we're a great company with nothing to hide", especially without Haley to snap facts back at them on the spot, which no one else could do, afaic.
And with 4 people asking questions in conference call style it'll just be a useless mess.

Also, I think Joe left the building for good...which casts serious doubt as to how honest this last 2+2 contact attempt really was, if this is the case.

so that's why there's no Sebok action figure

This!!!! My left nut will answer questions before Paul Legget is going to agree.

I will say this once again...

My brothers... you are not going to nail down Joe Sebok. The dude is getting 30k a month from UB - you are barking up the wrong tree by asking him questions.

Joe, you talk a lot about "being a man" etc. Please be a MAN and answer my question:

You said you would quit if you found out UB mgt was lying to you. What evidence do you need to make this happen?

Please be a MAN and stand by your word.

agree with todd's point about real-time follow up and cornering being important, but that won't happen with mike and adam, it'll only happen with the right people.

but even if it's the right people, i think the advantages of real time leading and cornering, etc, would be offset by it being more difficult to keep the conversation organized, being that it's a very detail intensive situation.

All you need is a locked thread, that only mods can post in. Then UB/seebok and haley and co can submit questions and responses to it without any noise being present. Odd important questions from the general masses could go in as well if mods deem it necessary/

This is a good post and exactly what I kept thinking to myself as I read through this thread. How on earth could you go to work for a company that has been involved in widespread cheating of it's players and not even know who the current owners are?

That question really needs to be addressed.

This thread has been interesting, I read every post and a lot of them were high-quality and well thought out. I used to run a blog that shed light on scammers in the spiritual world. IMO, scammers are scammers no matter what walk of life and they share similar characteristics.

Joe Sebok seems more like a "true believer" type to me. Scammers in the spiritual world tend to have die-hard followers that will defend them to the ends of the earth no matter how strong the evidence. At some point, certain followers might lose faith or cross-over to "non-believer" status, and perhaps Joe is starting to edge closer to that line.

But here are some basic elements that aren't likely to change:

1. Joe Sebok is not interested in truly dissecting this situation, which he states and restates over and over in this thread, citing his own ignorance on the pertinent matters.
2. Joe has a vested financial stake in the company and appears blind to how this financial stake has created a situation where he would rather remain ignorant than know the truth.
3. Joe clearly holds little sway or power within the company, and if he ever truly held anyone's feet to the fire--would be fired.

Companies like UB (ie scammers) do not employ people that show any interest in rocking the boat or being whistle blowers. Joe is therefore not in any way shape or form a whistle blower, he doesn't have the mentality or stomach for it.

In conclusion, Joe will never successfully set up any legitimate interview situation, he will never truly question his bosses in any meaningful way, and he will not help to shed further light on the history or current state of UB.

The most anyone can hope for Joe Sebok is that at some point the light bulb goes off and he realizes who he works for--and quits. That is all that will come of anything with Joe Sebok.

Edit: After he quits, assuming he does, you may then find out a few little shady tidbits that Joe witnessed before deciding to leave. But they won't be mind-blowing or likely very helpful beyond confirming what most of us already thought about UB.

I think you are really off on this one. You say it warranted an apology, but Joe never gave a real apology. You again blame the victim who had no obligation to keep a disgusting message sent to him by a UB employee about UB private, or even to handle it privately.

And if you don't see Joe's second threat as a threat, you aren't reading it clearly. He was clearly telling FE the dirt Joe has on FE's girlfriend will be publicly released very quickly if FE doesn't STFU.

The worst part isn't that you quickly praised Joe's original non-apology, it's giving him a free pass when he immediately attacks his victims again. I'm disappointed in you GT.

Let's review what Joe really "apologized for".

Notice he doesn't apologize to Jon, the girlfriend, or give specifics of why the DM was over the line. He mentions himself repeatedly, but shows not empathy for how the people who received that threatening DM must have felt. He just apologizes to no one in particular for behaving less than perfectly without really saying what he did that was wrong.

It's all about Joe. No empathy about how Jon should feel when a near stranger who represents UB sends him ominous message about his GF. In fact, Joe has to try to make it Jon's fault because childish Joe thinks making UB related threats should be protected by some veil of secrecy.

Again, the original message can only be interpreted in two ways, either a blackmail attempt, or a request for FE to back off because UB has skeletons in it's closet Joe doesn't want talked about. Joe saying it wasn't a blackmail attempt doesn't count for much, because his whole apology so far is so insincere, it's almost dishonest.

Again, it's how Joe feels and felt, and his attempt to avoid getting his ass beat. No empathy, no real apology to his direct victims.

I mean, COME ON! Joe actually had the balls to end by insinuating Jon should apologize for not keeping Joes douchey UB threat secret.

Joe's "apology" was thin air and misdirection. He apologized to the world in general for some slight personal failings, without being too specific about how slimy he was, and only mentioning the victims to point the finger of blame in their direction.

Then the coup de grace.

Joe ignores the fact that the GF's stress was created by the original DM, not the posting of it publicly. Or does he think that veiled threats by a public figure to expose her "secret" shouldn't bother her as long as no one else knows?

Again, it's all about Joe. FE posted one short message asking why Joe brought the GF into it at all, and he lashes out immediately with another threat. Clearly Joe will never give them any legitimate apology. He's narcissistic, and delusional, and blaming FE for his own mess created from that "poorly worded" DM. Joe has some childish belief that he can behave as horribly as he wants and people will cover for him, and if someone he mistreats reveals it publicly THEY are the problem, not Joe and his behavior.

I'm not sure why anyone wants to ask Joe questions about UB at all. He clearly knows nothing, and has done nothing to get to the bottom of even basic UB questions. He's a front man taking a desperately needed paycheck, and clearly can never unbias himself enough to expose any of his employer's shortcomings.

But worse is, there is no need to ask UB questions either. They are clearly still corrupt. If they were legit they would have answered these questions clearly eons ago. Clearly they don't answer the questions because the answers would indict current ownership and management. Their behavior is perfect proof of the answers, so why do we still keep asking questions?

The real question for Mason is why isn't UB banned from advertising on 2+2, and listed prominently on the top of every forum on 2+2 as an outlaw site, with a warning it's not safe to play there or trust UB with your money?

Don't we have some obligation to the general poker community to keep players from unknowingly depositing money on shady sites?

This is really the better point here. UB is clearly a very corrupt and untrustworthy site, and the burden is on them to come here and prove otherwise. There should be something officially listed on 2+2 stating that Ultimate Bet is a site "not recommended" for players. As trite as this sounds, it's a good line in the sand.

Force UB to come with hat in hand to get the "not recommended" flag removed from 2+2. They won't do that, of course, but it doesn't matter. You highlight and call the scammers what they are and then hope for the best.

Yeah...good luck with that. 2+2 obviously considered doing something like this and decided against it for legal reasons.

If 2+2 moved in the direction of declaring UB a "dangerous" site and advising people not to play on it (thereby losing UB a ton of business), the burden of proving it to be true with UB's "new" management in place would be on 2+2, and clearly, despite serious doubt and the fact that some (mostly Haley, afaik) seem to have accumulated pretty damning evidence against that new management, the legal implications for 2+2 would be pretty dire.

Not gonna happen. Not until conclusive proof of wrong-doing by UB's new management is out there.
Until that, any move by 2+2 against UB could have serious legal consequences.

there is a sticky at the top of this forum (NVG) that is called the UB Scandal. NVG is the most highly trafficked sub forum on 2+2

UB hh's are not supported in the converter as well (afaik), but I agree, I would feel a lot more comfortable with 2+2 if the dropped all monetary ties with them

To be fair - I agree with this. He should stop representing himself as someone who will in any way be able to investigate the scandal or provide any real answers, or he should provide some useful answers.

However, I do appreciate that he is at least willing to respond to the posts, even if he has nothing to say of any real importance, and I don't think he should be stopped from posting simply because he actually doesn't know the answers. I don't feel like he is acting as a blind shill and ignoring the questions, so I think it's fair for him to keep posting (and fair for people to continue to demand better answers from him, point out inconsistencies, and show him how naive he's really being in all of this).

We have no monetary ties to UB and would not accept any advertising from them. This statement and similar ones in other posts are wrong.

MM

Just popping in here to say +1 more for an open dialogue as Ike/Mason/etc have suggested. Todd Terry has a valid point, but I think in this case it would be too easy for Paul/a UB rep to just sidestep questions and change the focus if it is done in an interview format.

I agree with Ike that ideally it would be a thread on 2p2 where a short list of approved people can post, but we all can view. It would be a shame if it was just an open thread as the signal-to-noise ratio would make it nearly unreadable. It would also be a lot easier to just avoid the serious question if they are drown out by hundreds of other posts.

It's highly unlikely that something like this will really get put together, but I really hope it does. If Joe really wants as much of the truth to come out as possible, I think he should be able to find a way to make this happen.

Oh ok sorry, I took the previous post as truth without doing my research, sorry. My bad.

all the drama: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29...witter-999564/

This combo is still the solid gold in this thread:

seebs -"I was not telling him I was literally going to expose skeletons in his closet."
+
seebs - "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."

I apologize for not knowing this, and want to let you know your position is greatly appreciated.

There's a difference between a sticky with a thread that says "scandal" which could mean a lot of different things and takes time to read through, versus a very simple "not recommended" statement.

A not recommended statement shouldn't have many legal repercussions, since 2+2 is allowed to give forth a recommendation if they so choose. They could obviously back up the "not recommended" status with some important details.

Is this going to solve the problem? No, but it's not something UB would exactly enjoy to see on the #1 poker site in the world either.

Also, a sticky on a thread doesn't truly indicate a position that is being taken by 2+2 on the matter. For 2+2 to make a clear statement that Ultimate Bet is not a recommended site somewhere visible on their page would be a very loud shot across UB's bow.

Excellent post.

I agree with this. It can be done without any real liability issue, and can also be a point of leverage with UB. One approach would be large text at the top of every poker related forum.

"TwoPlusTwo recommends not playing on UB until all questions about how it cheated players are answered."

That text could link to an explanation page, along with the list of unanswered questions about UB that need to be answered before players should feel safe playing there.

UB has admitted it cheated players.

UB has not answered all important questions about the scandal.

It can't debate those two facts, and it probably couldn't sue in any jurisdiction given it's status as an off-shore poker site, but even if it could it certainly doesn't have any basis to sue given it's admitted those facts.

The question is just how much effort TwoPlusTwo wants to put into it. This site has other purposes as well, there may be fallout other than specific legal liability they won't want to deal with, and it may just be a resource issue.

I'd like to see them do it, but it obviously costs me nothing, they have to do the work and take the flack.

Isn't it more likely that this was just a regular fish whose account was used to superuse as described by Maker.

Reread what you wrote a couple of times, this is what your implying right?

I don't think I'm blaming the victim at all. I believe FE has every right to tweet whatever he wishes, without being subjected to threatening/blackmailing tweets in response. Sebok's original message acknowledges that explicitly, and apologizes for it.

Just to be clear, I think the original message *was* threatening -- but it was an implied threat rather than an explicit one. I think it's quite possible that Sebok didn't think he was threatening FE at the time, but that's immaterial -- FE asked for a public apology, and was granted one.

This makes no sense. Or rather, it only makes sense if FE knows something about Sebok/UB that he's keeping quiet about. There's zero advantage to Sebok in risking the damage to his reputation and potential criminal charges if all Fatal Error is doing is being yet another voice in the chorus of thousands who are pointing out UB/Joe Sebok's shortcomings.

I agree that his follow-up was tactless and a bit clueless -- but he does strikes me as being somewhat tactless and a bit clueless. That's not a hanging offence though.

When someone stands up and says 'What I did was wrong and stupid. I ****ed up and I'm sorry', I think it's churlish to turn around and say that their apology isn't sincere because it doesn't use a form of words that you approve of. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I think you have to take what they say at face value. But I understand that we disagree about whether the second reference to the girlfriend constitutes a repetition of the initial offence.

I'll look at the interaction between FE and Sebok again and see if I've missed something, but this really wasn't my read of it initially. But the second response to FE initially looked more like cluelessness than malice to me.


Completely agree with all this.

Entertaining thread.

How badly do you think Sebok regrets starting this thread? And do you think he regrets signing with UB or is the $$$ enough to stomach the embarassment?