Printable View
Druff,Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Could you explain this? I must not understand how these networks work. Because I thought that the skin with winning players is owed money by the other skins, as the money flows from losing players and skins to winning players and skins. Because a skin with winners needs money from the skins with the losers in order to fund the payouts and balances of its winning players.
100% correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadlyDruff,Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Could you explain this? I must not understand how these networks work. Because I thought that the skin with winning players is owed money by the other skins, as the money flows from losing players and skins to winning players and skins. Because a skin with winners needs money from the skins with the losers in order to fund the payouts and balances of its winning players.
This was Eric making up excuses (or parroting those given to him by Jennifer) without thinking about what he was actually saying.
Indeed, Lock had the most fish, and left them owing Revolution a ton of money. They stiffed Revolution on this.
Intertops got really screwed, and ended up paying their players out of their own pocket. Other smaller skins (including one in Russia) went down because of this.
Druff,
I just listened to your coverage of Rizen in the arCHive of yesterday's radio show. Your fake crying and music had me in stitches!
That being said, I don't think you comprehend how strong the emotional bond can be with someone who was "there" for a person in a deeply trying time, like a messy divorce -- even a non-family remember. Having been through one myself, I am not shy to say that I would likely remain "silent" if I came to believe that the person who was really there for me through that time was cheating others financially if I thought they ultimately had a good intent, such as trying to save their business. If they were outright scamming, I would grit my teeth and speak out. But if I thought they were doing shady stuff to save their "dream", I'd remain silent until there was no possibility of that "dream" being saved.
And if that makes me a "bad person" who should be banned from a public community where some people were victimized, so be it.
1) Poor planning + thieving proccessors (and/or seizures) have taken down a lot of offshore gaming sites.
Pokerspot and Russ Boyd were the first. He wasn't smart enough to figure out how to continue processing after Tony Brown of E-payment solutions, who scammed a lot of people, stole the processed funds:
http://www.bettorsworld.com/web/foru...ll-in-business
http://www.majorwager.com/forums/mes...-straight.html
2) How do we know she stole 10 million? There are a ton of unscrupulous processors that will process a payment and never pay the operator of the website. Some, like Pokerstars, had enough integrity and real business to pay the players off after seizures and getting stiffed from processors, others like FTP had less integrity and could of paid players if they weren't so busy enriching themselves and some, like Lock I assume, didn't get rich but got stiffed and passed the losses off the players after they could find no way to process payments reliably. Isn't it more likely operating costs, seizures and getting stuffed by processors is a more likely explanation for what happened, other than she stole every dollar that was deposited?
3) Integrity isn't something you "owe" someone. The guy stopped responding to your emails so you betrayed him? Whatever. Nothing he posted in there is even remotely shocking - common sense tells us Lock had big time processing problems and couldn't process deposits reliably.
You were wrong to post them and he was an idiot for "confiding" in you for basically no reason. Yea, he should of quit long ago but I am sure he thought at some point his loyalty might be rewarded if the company ever turned it around.
From my own experiences with Eric on 2+2, as well as closely observing the situation for years, I concluded that he was an accomplice to a scam. Whether he was an accomplice due to willful ignorance or intentional desire to help steal is immaterial. Eric was clearly intelligent enough, experienced enough, and following the situation closely enough to know what was going on. And if he didn't, he should have.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidewinder
He didn't come to me because he was looking to open up to someone or make things up to victims. He came because HipAintCheap shook the Lock Hiding Tree, and the various accomplices such as Shane and Eric scampered out of hiding due to fear. Indeed, Eric even said that he wasn't going to come forward publicly, because he still felt loyal to Jennifer, which was unbelievable given the state of things at that point.
When someone guilty of criminal actions (even if not yet convicted) comes to you "in confidence", you're in a funny position.
If someone came to you and confessed to a murder, but asked you to keep quiet about it, it's unlikely you would.
If someone came to you and confessed to molesting a child and asked you to keep quiet, again, it's unlikely you would.
So what about an accomplice to a scam? Not nearly as bad as murder or child molestation, but it still requires a determination of, "Does this person deserve my confidence?"
I decided that Eric lied to the poker public for years and helped cost them upwards of $10 million, and even as late as 2014 was still on that sinking scam ship. So I didn't feel terrible about posting his e-mails, especially since he clearly stopped cooperating once a few months passed and he didn't feel scared of the HipAintCheap stuff anymore.
Eric had 6 months from the point he contacted me until I posted his e-mails to do the right thing. He did not. Instead, he tried to return to the poker scene as if nothing happened. That angered me to the point where I felt it was to the public's benefit to post those e-mails.
Druff, of course it would be wrong to keep in confidence your hypothetical revealatons but this guy seems pretty harmless (based on what he revealed to you); not to mention incapable of self examination: Kids, marriage, divorce, whatever - he always seems to have an excuse for what he did. In my opinion he compromised his integrity to follow his dream of jumping on the last train to poker riches.
I don't remember the guy saying "boo" for over a year and I hardly think he actively harmed anyone. Like many of the last UB and FTP hold-outs, he was hanging onto the lie of recovery. Who can forget those assholes Scott Clements and Eric Seidel wearing the FTP gear during the world series after Black Friday?? WTF. Way worse behavior in my opinion.
I don't remember this guy flaunting the Lock Poker brand about when it was clear all was lost.
If Lock Poker could of processed deposits reliably, I believe they would still be in business and so would Dutch Boyd. I don't think these people set out to scam anyone, they were just victimized by payment processors that never paid them.
Druff, saying that Rizen is a criminal is presumptive. While Jennifer clearly knew the financial condition of Lock, Rizen was most likely not privy to that information given her management style and his position at Lock. He did not have the authority to verify her claims, but unwisely for his reputation, trusted here to be able to pull it off and make the players whole. At least until Portugal, after which he pulled away and went silent.
As such, while he is "guilty" of having bad judgement, he would not be considered as committing or abetting fraud, which is the actual crime Jennifer would be guilty of because she definitely knew the financial condition of the firm, as well as its prospects. And certainly lied to Rizen about such matters.
But bad judgement, in this case trusting Jennifer was being honest with him, is not a crime regardless of how many people were hurt by trusting Rizen, nor how much doubt Rizen may have had about her claims. Because having doubts, no matter how strong, is not the same as having confirmation, and THEN intentionally misrepresenting the facts. And to make a claim otherwise without evidence is presumptive.
Meaning, you seemed to have donned the robes of a Grand Inquisitor and are calling for Rizen to be put on the rack right next to Larson until he confesses his "crime" of "conspiring" with her to defraud players. Sorry. It wouldn't hold up in a court of law, even civil court, given his position with the firm as merely a representative, not an officer with formal access to the financial information of the firm.
Side,Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidewinder
I generally agree with your comments about the other part of your last post, but at some point, Jennifer was committing fraud by either telling her public reps (pros and online reps, like Rizen and Shane) by lying to them, or directing them to lie. Because her actions most certainly meet the criteria to be considered fraud.
http://bochettoandlentz.com/criminal...ts-difference/Quote:
Whether criminal or civil, fraud generally has several legal elements, including the following:
Misrepresentation of a material fact
Knowledge on the part of the accused that they were misrepresenting the fact
The misrepresentation was made purposefully, with the intent of fooling the victim
The victim believed the misrepresentation and relied upon it
The victim suffered damages as a result of the misrepresentation
And it doesn't matter whether her intent was to rescue the firm by lying to keep the promise of Lock Poker alive. Once she orchestrated the public to be deceased about the financial condition of the firm, she crossed over to fraud. Even if the alternative of being honest about the financial condition of Lock would likely have sunk the ship sooner.
Eric Lynch was the poker room manager. Managers are always responsible for what is going on, at least from the point when they are aware of what is going on.
When he was aware?
Lynch: "I'm straying from the question a bit but Jennifer and I had some disagreements on the Portugal trip. I did confront her and ask why Lock wasn't cancelling the trip and using those funds to pay out players."
Wait, what? If payment processor issues were the reason for delayed and non payments, how could save the costs for the Portugal retreat solve the processing issues?!?
His statement clearly confirms that he was in May 2013 very well aware that payments were very delayed or non existent because the money simply was not there and not because millions of $$ player funds were there, but because of the payment processor issues they were not able to send the money to the customers.
Also, there might be temporarly issues with payment processors to the U.S., but ROW payment processors like Neteller, Skrill, bank wire and whatever method never had an issue!
If the player funds would have been on bank accounts(like they should), they would have been able to send them to the customers within a few business days.
Also, Lynch said that Larson searched for investors on the Portugal retreat, but why search for investors if the $15 millions or more player funds do exist?!? This makes absolutely no sense.
Larson searching for investors in May 2013, while all payment processing methods had an issue(which is technically not possible) means that the player funds did not exist.
There is no other explanation possible and Lynch was very well aware of this. Therefore he is guilty for participating in this scam.
You make some good points here. Can you find posts on 2+2 prior to May 2013 where Rizen told players the money was segregated? I know Shane did at some point, but answered in a way that indicated that he was told by someone else (Jennifer?) that the funds were segregated. Such an admission prior to when he went silent/pulled away would be a smoking gun that he also committed fraud. But if he instead promised that Lock was working to figure out a way to pay players without directly saying that Lock had the funds on hand, then it is not so clear that he committed fraud.Quote:
Originally Posted by Towerflower
Feel free to quote the passage indicating that Shane was told by someone else (Jennifer?)
-> http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...84&postcount=9Quote:
Player funds are completely segregated, your checks were in no way bankrolling the acquisition.
With the move there has been a slight increase in the processing times of checks, but this was just the result of the extra workload that was created by the move.
-> http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=912Quote:
jay94: Shane is there any evidence supporting, that you guys are making progress through this backlog, which honestly seems to be never ending?
Shane: The most recent evidence is our ability to turn around some checks to replace WU cashouts in a couple of days and the slight improvement in Neteller cashout times.
Neteller and checks will the be first to get clearly caught us since they are used less than Skrill and WU but with the volumes being pushed through all methods every month those will all get caught up.
For me the other great sign for me is the continuity of these cashouts. Previously there have been a couple of false starts in trying to get caught up but this time the right processing partners are in place and we have been able to week after week continue to attack the backlogs and keep pushing forward.
I'm inclined to believe that Shane knew the funds weren't segregated, but I specifically asked for posts by Rizen saying on a public forum that the players funds were segregated. If you can find them, please post them here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Towerflower