60 Minutes piece this coming Sunday
12-01-2008
, 12:05 AM
12-01-2008
, 12:16 AM
12-01-2008
, 12:27 AM
12-01-2008
, 12:45 AM
12-01-2008
, 12:59 AM
I sent the below e-mail to some friends and family after watching the 60 Minutes piece on the Absolute Scandal. If you find it interesting and/or informative, great. If you find it tl;dr, that's okay too. 
Message starts now:
So, 60 Minutes aired its exposé on the Absolute Poker cheating scandal tonight; it was supposed to air at the end of October but, I don't know, I guess there was some big election of historical significance or something in the United States that kept pushing it back. The story is available at: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4639016n
Prior to the airing of the story, I had mixed feelings about the coverage of it.
On the one hand, this is a company that needs public scrutiny; when you're responsible for wrongdoings that took your consumers for $20 million, that's something that demands public attention.
On the other hand, this country has so many misconceptions about gambling and what the proper legal response to it is that, if not handled properly--and especially with poker's current precarious legal status in the dawning hours of the Bush Administration--it could result in a very negative outcome for the game.
With that said, after watching the story, I was pleased with the angle 60 Minutes took on the story. Despite one factual inaccuracy (they repeatedly said throughout the story that online poker is illegal in the United States; in reality, it's not illegal nationwide and is an issue left to the individual states to determine), the story seemed to imply that regulation of the industry is needed, which is a position that I find favorable. They repeatedly made reference to the fact that there are no legal channels for online poker players to take should scandals such as these occur; indeed, it's especially difficult to implement and enforce regulations over an industry that's largely based outside of the United States.
My own thoughts are that outright bans are rarely effective (see: prohibition). Yes, gambling has the potential to become addictive and you can cause great damage to yourself if you don't partake in it responsibly. But the same is true of consuming alcohol or cigarettes; that doesn't mean that we make them illegal. Instead, we allow people to have the freedom to partake in these activities but we provide regulation over these industries to ensure that they don't coerce or otherwise take advantage of their consumers and the addictive nature of their products. We place an additional tax on these products so that we might provide services to those who might have gone a little too far with alcohol or tobacco, so that they might seek rehabilitation.
The bottom line is that we don't deny people the benefits of alcohol simply because some might abuse it. The same should be true of poker.
Message starts now:So, 60 Minutes aired its exposé on the Absolute Poker cheating scandal tonight; it was supposed to air at the end of October but, I don't know, I guess there was some big election of historical significance or something in the United States that kept pushing it back. The story is available at: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4639016n
Prior to the airing of the story, I had mixed feelings about the coverage of it.
On the one hand, this is a company that needs public scrutiny; when you're responsible for wrongdoings that took your consumers for $20 million, that's something that demands public attention.
On the other hand, this country has so many misconceptions about gambling and what the proper legal response to it is that, if not handled properly--and especially with poker's current precarious legal status in the dawning hours of the Bush Administration--it could result in a very negative outcome for the game.
With that said, after watching the story, I was pleased with the angle 60 Minutes took on the story. Despite one factual inaccuracy (they repeatedly said throughout the story that online poker is illegal in the United States; in reality, it's not illegal nationwide and is an issue left to the individual states to determine), the story seemed to imply that regulation of the industry is needed, which is a position that I find favorable. They repeatedly made reference to the fact that there are no legal channels for online poker players to take should scandals such as these occur; indeed, it's especially difficult to implement and enforce regulations over an industry that's largely based outside of the United States.
My own thoughts are that outright bans are rarely effective (see: prohibition). Yes, gambling has the potential to become addictive and you can cause great damage to yourself if you don't partake in it responsibly. But the same is true of consuming alcohol or cigarettes; that doesn't mean that we make them illegal. Instead, we allow people to have the freedom to partake in these activities but we provide regulation over these industries to ensure that they don't coerce or otherwise take advantage of their consumers and the addictive nature of their products. We place an additional tax on these products so that we might provide services to those who might have gone a little too far with alcohol or tobacco, so that they might seek rehabilitation.
The bottom line is that we don't deny people the benefits of alcohol simply because some might abuse it. The same should be true of poker.
12-01-2008
, 01:01 AM
Mason and I don't always see eye to eye. It's his forum and I'm fine with it.
Thanks! I appreciate the compliment. 
Quote:
You're one of the best posters on twoplustwo IMO. You contribute far more than most people here.
12-01-2008
, 02:02 AM
12-01-2008
, 08:37 AM
12-01-2008
, 08:39 AM
12-01-2008
, 11:06 AM
12-01-2008
, 12:31 PM
12-01-2008
, 01:22 PM
12-01-2008
, 06:23 PM