One is better than none.....the encouragement is somewhat gay....but we need players to know that taking a stand is the RIGHT thing to do here...and that we got their back (although we all know the reason why they stay...poker welfare obv).Quote:
Originally Posted by BeerAndPoker
That's great Chris Moorman left but people are making him out to be a hero on 2+2 when he's not that but definitely several steps ahead of the others by leaving.Quote:
Originally Posted by Erin Micunt
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffIt was so easy to set Shane up to pretty much self-destruct on 2+2.Quote:
Originally Posted by BCR
The guy was lying so routinely that all I had to do was ask him a question where it would be easy to disprove his lie, and he took the bait. Then he took the bait again when he returned after his hiatus.
The incompetence at Lock is only exceeded by its shadiness.
That was unreal. I mean, you didn't ask a vague question. You asked about a specific location. You clearly wouldn't ask that without already knowing the answer. His response was retarded given you had to know. Better to avoid the question a 1000 times rather than outright lie, and that he was smarmy about your sources in the reply just makes him look more foolish. Amazing amount of arrogance coming from such a failboat operation. Usually that tone in a company is set from the top down. I don't know much about this Jen woman, is that her reputation? I haven't paid a ton of attention about the Lock situation because I just expect US facing sites to be a scam at this point, but it has now become interesting, if only as a cautionary tale in how not to do PR, and because of the group-think responses from their poker pros.
There's a lot of evidence to indicate that Lock is broke.
- Segregation of cash game players
- Segregation of tournaments
- Cancellations of cashouts, especially large ones
- Extremely slow non-US payouts, despite all other sites being able to pay quickly
- Non-payment of skins
- Refusal to allow their finances to be audited, even if someone else pays for the audit
However, there is one piece of evidence that is arguably bigger than all of the above combined, and I don't feel it's getting enough discussion:
- Lock has been almost completely silent about the situation, and is willfully allowing its reputation to hit rock bottom.
This is the strongest piece of evidence that all -- or at least most -- of the assumptions about Lock are 100% true.
Lock has spent a LOT of money on marketing. Let me count the ways:
- They've taken out lots of expensive print ads in poker magazines
- They've paid for a lot of expensive spots on 2+2 and other high-traffic websites
- They have hired a LOT of pros, paid them well, and have taken them on expensive yearly retreats
Needless to say, Lock has put a lot of money into growing their site.
In just a matter of weeks, Lock has gone from a shady-looking but still viable site into a spiraling mess of scandal, controversy, innuendo, and hatred.
Not surprisingly, their traffic is rapidly dwindling, and their loyal players are leaving in droves. Two site pros have already quit due to the ongoing scandals, and I'm sure more will follow.
If all of the allegations are true, this makes sense. If Lock is broke, they can't just invent money where it doesn't exist. If they can't process cashouts right now (due to having no money), they can't just reinstate the unfairly-canceled payouts, as they will have no money to pay these people. If they can't reinstate the payouts, they also can't communicate a clear transfer/cashout policy, as it would immediately raise questions as to why the canceled cashouts have not been reinstated. If they are insolvent, they cannot agree to an audit that will show they are healthy. If they are busto or close to it, they can't talk about their expensive Portugal trip without looking even worse than they already do.
Lock CEO Jennifer Larson might not be cut out to run a medium-sized online poker room, but she's not an idiot. She sees what's happening to her company. She sees the walls crashing down around her. She sees that all of the money spent on marketing, lavish pro retreats, and everywhere else is about to go down the toilet. If there were a rational explanation to put a stop to all of this, she would have presented that long ago.
It is said that an innocent man wants to shout his innocence from the mountaintops and wants all circumstances closely examined, while a guilty man stays quiet and tries to find ways to suppress the ability to investigate.
This is definitely the case here. Lock has no reason to stay quiet. They have no reason to be unable to communicate a simple policy regarding transferred money. They have no reason to leave cashouts canceled for weeks that should rightfully be reinstated. They have no reason to not bend over backwards to pay non-US players in any way possible, even if they are supposedly having problems with one payout method.
But they do have a reason. That reason is insolvency.
To all Lock defenders, please answer the following:
1) WHY has Lock been unable to directly state the cashout policy regarding transfers, and WHY have they not been able to communicate this policy to the 5 or so customer service reps answering e-mail. You might say, "Lock is incompetent with customer service", but do you really believe that incompetence is the answer for 3 weeks of failing to address this simple, while the site literally burns to the ground? Do you really think your boss Jennifer is that stupid?
2) WHY have the canceled cashouts not been reinstated? It takes about 5 minutes per account to do this. It has been 3 weeks. Given the importance of this issue, why wouldn't Lock invest a few hours and solve this?
3) WHY are all cashout methods for non-US players so slow? We heard the excuse about Skrill and their supposed limits. But why is every single method of payout so slow? If you want to blame it on the "backlog" caused by these supposed mass cashouts by shady affiliates, have you seen a single piece of evidence to support this?
4) WHY did Lock promise a new 2+2 rep to replace Shane, but this individual dropped one terrible and useless post, and completely vanished? Does your company not care to address all of these very serious matters on the world's biggest poker forum? How can you explain this other than an inability to answer questions truthfully, and a further inability to sell convincing lies?
5) WHY is the Portugal trip still being covered up? We all know it happened. There can no longer be excuses about "unwanted guests" crashing the event, since it's finished. Yet every single attendee of the event is under strict orders not to talk about it. Why is that, if the trip was not taken with player funds? What is there to hide?
6) WHY have we not heard any statements yet from Jennifer Larson herself? It seems that Lock only communicates through low-level slugs, so this way they can blame the messenger if their statements are proven to be untrue. Can you explain why Jennifer has not agreed to any interviews by an unbiased third party?
7) WHY does Lock refuse to answer questions about the Girah scandal, two years after-the-fact? They were caught being complicit in one of their own pros cheating a major contest. We have never received sufficient answers about this. There is no lawsuit filed anywhere. WHY can't we get closure here?
8) WHY doesn't Lock attempt to satisfy the 2+2 community, in order to get their high-producing ads back on the site? Does Lock hate money? Or do they realize they can't satisfy the community with lies and obfuscation?
The answer is simple.
Lock realizes that it is impossible to answer the tough questions. Their lies have been taken apart and destroyed. There is no way out of this mess other than to stay silent for a few weeks, gather a few bucks together, start paying a few cashouts in June, and hope that Father Time heals all of the wounds.
They know that we can't go on discussing this forever. Eventually, we will lose interest. Eventually, there won't be anything new. Sure, there will be a few diehards that won't let it drop, but much like UB, most people will move past it and forget about it.
Lock is trying to get a few cashouts going, by way of robbing Peter to pay Paul, to give the impression that everything is A-OK, and hopes everything else will fall into place.
Even the pros posting here seem to have the same message: "Wait a few weeks, cashouts will start again, and all will be good! You'll see!"
The silence is really the key here. Lock isn't answering us because they can't answer.
Remember that when a few people start receiving payouts next month.
Look forward to this weeks radio. Maybe you can get some lock pros on the phone.
Druff, I'm surprised you haven't hypothesized that JennyPoo is playing the damsel in distress and trying to woo a White Knight savior to dump a pile of funds into her sinking ship. Then she can whip up a new story and start the cashouts again. I would not be surprised if she isn't just waiting for the due diligence of an investor to be completed and that is why she is still leading everyone on.
Very possible. I've thought of this, too, but haven't really discussed it yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deal
It's indeed possible that this investor is going to ship his funds in June, which will "right the ship", and she's just stalling until then.
However, if that's the case, she is a moron for not addressing all of the issues (transfer policies, canceled cashouts, etc) if everyone is really going to get paid in just a few weeks.
To me this looks like, "We can't reinstante anyone's cashouts or stop retroactively canceling them because we don't know yet how much money we're going to have to pay people next month."
1.) I think the current cashout policy has been stated a few times. Goes something like this one:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
"In accordance to our END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT, on said site it is not permitted to cashout funds received via transfers from other players:
a. A receiving User agrees that they may only use the funds from an account transfer to play the Games and not for any other purpose.
b. Users cannot cash out funds directly received from a transfer.
We therefore ask that you do not submit said cashout request and that you continue playing the received funds at our tables."
Think the policy is pretty similar currently.
2.) Unless I have missed something, I think the cashouts that where canceled where the accounts involved in the mis-use of the transfer policy. I also think anyone who had mistakenly had there transfer canceled has been moved to the front of the cashout line.
I have answered the rest of the questions over here if you want to read the rest, or ask any legit questions: http://www.pokerforums.org/online-po...tml#post308364
Ok, so you think you know a few things. Who are you? Are you suppose to know something? You answered absolutely nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by g9olt
Answer this one specific question. I transfer $5000 to player B. Player B plays for a few months and runs it down to $3500. Who owns that $3500? Who can cash it out, what is the process of doing it.
btw, there is really no benefit of being in a queue that isn't moving.
Lock Poker loses four "pros":
http://pokerfuse.com/news/industry/c...sements-08-05/
Chris Moorman and Paul Volpe have publicly resigned on Twitter.
Two other lesser-known pros (Andre Diaz and Justin Cook) have also disappeared from the Lock page, but neither has made a statement about it.
Here is a BLUFF article about Lock's 2011 retreat:
http://www.bluff.com/magazine/the-lock-in-1248/
Quote:
When the online poker room decided to give back to its slate of sponsored pros, Lock Poker owner Jennifer Larson wanted to wow them with the kind of experience that would be life changing. Resort stays, tropical paradises – all of these are things are commonplace to poker players used to the glitz and glamour of Las Vegas.
So, when push came to shove, Larson captured a castle. Not a castle in the figurative sense – a literal one, built in the 13th century and nestled in the Beaujolais region of France. The Chateau de Bagnols is a five-star property complete with vineyard, restaurant, and 21 restored rooms that look like they belong in a movie. She rented the entire property and brought her players and employees in to celebrate Lock’s tremendous growth over the past year.
This is actually interesting. g9olt works for Lock, or so he says.
Here are his responses to my questions, which he curiously posted on another site, despite my questions being posed over here.
I will post my original questions in BLUE, his response in RED, and my response to his response in GREEN.
Quote:
1) WHY has Lock been unable to directly state the cashout policy regarding transfers, and WHY have they not been able to communicate this policy to the 5 or so customer service reps answering e-mail. You might say, "Lock is incompetent with customer service", but do you really believe that incompetence is the answer for 3 weeks of failing to address this simple, while the site literally burns to the ground? Do you really think your boss Jennifer is that stupid?
I think the current cashout policy has been stated a few times. Goes something like this one:
"In accordance to our END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT, on said site it is not permitted to cashout funds received via transfers from other players:
a. A receiving User agrees that they may only use the funds from an account transfer to play the Games and not for any other purpose.
b. Users cannot cash out funds directly received from a transfer.
We therefore ask that you do not submit said cashout request and that you continue playing the received funds at our tables."
Think the policy is pretty similar currently.
No other site has a policy like this. The big problem is the fact that users cannot cash out funds from transfers. If this is true, it means Lock is simply stealing that money.
Even if you say you can just transfer the money back to the person who originally gave it to you, what if it's months later? What if it's years later? What if the person refuses to buy the money back from you, or is broke and/or out of poker?
Lock should NEVER keep transferred money. The industry standard regarding cashout of transferred money is to require some sort of playthrough. Lock is simply stealing it.
2) WHY have the canceled cashouts not been reinstated? It takes about 5 minutes per account to do this. It has been 3 weeks. Given the importance of this issue, why wouldn't Lock invest a few hours and solve this?
Unless I have missed something, I think the cashouts that where canceled where the accounts involved in the mis-use of the transfer policy. I also think anyone who had mistakenly had there transfer canceled has been moved to the front of the cashout line.
You're wrong. None of the cashouts that were canceled were those that were engaging in any sort of misbehavior -- at least not the people posting on 2+2. These were all longtime, known grinders who had raked many thousands of dollars on Lock over a long period of time. None of these people have been made whole yet. They have yet to hear from support/security on this issue. Read the 2+2 thread if you don't believe me.
This is a stalling tactic by Lock to avoid paying these players, especially the ones with the $10k withdrawals.
3) WHY are all cashout methods for non-US players so slow? We heard the excuse about Skrill and their supposed limits. But why is every single method of payout so slow? If you want to blame it on the "backlog" caused by these supposed mass cashouts by shady affiliates, have you seen a single piece of evidence to support this?
You pretty much answered the question. I don't want to get into to much detail, but most Lock affiliates are non-US, and our biggest affiliate who accounts for probably near 50% of our affiliate out goings in Non-US. Taking this into consideration along with the fact most non-US players only play on Lock because of the US fish, this also helps increase the amount of money from the US side to cover NON-US cash outs.
I don't know to much about the processing side, but the way I understand it is, if we receive the same or more deposits into say neteller for example, than the amount needed to withdraw from neteller, we would be able to instantly cashout all those withdrawals. The problem arises when like Lock we are cashing out far more through say neteller than we are receiving. So now we have to dip into the funds from US deposits to cover Non-US withdrawals.
Now eventhough people might think that shouldn't be a problem, it is when you are trying hid money from the DOJ. This is a simplistic example of whats happening but hopefully explains alittle as I understand it.
The above is a bunch of nonsense.
Every other site, including ones that serve both US and non-US players, are in the same boat as Lock, and yet they are completing non-US cashouts within hours or days.
If you have to "dip into US funds to make non-US withdrawals", you can simply transfer the money over from your US account to your non-US account. To claim that this situation is somehow taking 4 months (especially when other sites do it instantaneously) is a joke. This is yet another Lock stalling tactic because they simply don't have the money to pay.
Also keep in mind that your explanation runs counter to the latest story being peddled on 2+2 by the Lock Pros, who claim to have heard directly from Jennifer. The most recent story was that the "transfer abusers" cashed out too much, and it caused a "cashout backlog" for Skrill.
If you're going to lie on behalf of Lock, at least get the lie straight.
By the way, are you actually involved in the Lock payment processing, or are you just believing the lie-du-jour that Jennifer feeds you?
4) WHY did Lock promise a new 2+2 rep to replace Shane, but this individual dropped one terrible and useless post, and completely vanished? Does your company not care to address all of these very serious matters on the world's biggest poker forum? How can you explain this other than an inability to answer questions truthfully, and a further inability to sell convincing lies?
I am only guessing here, but I have a feeling the new rep might have gave up on 2+2 after making one statement and getting bashed from all sides. He was also being accused of being Shane. When I can say now I know 100% this was not Shane. So sometimes when you have nothing new to say, and people are trying to prove everything you say is lies, best thing might be to stop talking and start doing.
Take the thread the new rep started giving people an update: it ended up 10 pages long of people accusing him of all sorts.
You mentioned above that "Joseph" the new rep had nothing new to say. Exactly. That's why people bashed him. They wanted real answers, not the same regurgitated lies and carefully crafted company lines that reveal nothing.
Lock agreed with the 2+2 owners to replace Shane and put in a support person who would be able to properly address all concerns to the general public's satisfaction. Instead, we just got a few paragraphs of the same BS we have been reading from Shane for months. That's not what the players were expecting, and they deserve so much more than that.
Furthermore, when you work in customer service, especially for a terrible company like Lock, you need thick skin. If you get insulted when people don't buy your evasive and untrue statements, you should get another job, rather than finding the public's displeasure a valid excuse for jumping ship.
How do you know 100% that it wasn't Shane? Aren't you the slightest bit suspicious regarding the spelling and language similarities, as well as the Germany location? Regardless of who it actually was, they were terrible, and beyond a disappointment.
5) WHY is the Portugal trip still being covered up? We all know it happened. There can no longer be excuses about "unwanted guests" crashing the event, since it's finished. Yet every single attendee of the event is under strict orders not to talk about it. Why is that, if the trip was not taken with player funds? What is there to hide?
I am pretty sure the Lock trip is no longer being hidden. During the trip Lock didn't want people know for obvious reasons. And since its been leaked people have been making a massive deal about it, so I guess no one wants to brag currently about how awesome it was.
FALSE. While everyone knows the trip took place, none of the Lock Pros are willing to talk about it -- not even to confirm they were there or that the trip existed. Shane also will not discuss it, aside from admitting that some Lock Pros were in Portugal. Nobody is asking for anyone to brag. They are asking for details -- the length of the trip, the details of it, the overall expense, who paid, and where the money came from. These details have not been provided, because the truth is that player money funded this trip, and Lock realizes that discussing the lavish details will just get everyone even angrier. Lock Pros seem willing to answer every question (albeit poorly) except for anything about the Portugal trip, meaning they are under strict orders never to mention or acknowledge it. Shady!
6) WHY have we not heard any statements yet from Jennifer Larson herself? It seems that Lock only communicates through low-level slugs, so this way they can blame the messenger if their statements are proven to be untrue. Can you explain why Jennifer has not agreed to any interviews by an unbiased third party?
Try and find an unbiased third party. (That was meant to be tongue in cheek). But any official statement that comes from any Lock rep, take Shane for example, is as good as coming from Jenn.
Jenn is the CEO of Lock, but I don't see why everyone is looking for a quote from Jenn other than so they can dismantle it to use against her. But any info that Jenn wants to pass on comes in an official statement usually.
But to be honest I don't see this as a legitimate gripe. Don't see any costumers demanding to chat to Bill Gates if windows starts playing up, or the fact the original xbox was glitchy. Might be a bad example, but you get the point.
If Microsoft was taking people's money for their products, holding it indefinitely, and refusing to deliver anything, you bet Bill Gates would eventually come out and make a statement about it.
People want to hear from Jennifer because the ship is sinking and she is nowhere to be found. If everyone believes Lock is broke, and the CEO refuses to present herself to explain what's been going on, she is doing her company a huge disservice. How can you not see this?
Shane is all over the place, and never gives any concrete answers. He ultimately refers people to e-mail security when he ends up being useless (which is ALWAYS), and security just ignores everyone or sends them ridiculous form letters. Shane frequently blames miscommunication from above when he's caught in a lie or contradiction. If Jennifer herself could come out and clarify things, then there would be no more "misunderstanding" sort of excuses. A good example is the transfer policy. Shane has never been able to communicate a policy that is consistent with Lock's actions or security/support's view on it. When the left hand never knows what the right hand is doing, that's the sign of a TERRIBLE company.
7) WHY does Lock refuse to answer questions about the Girah scandal, two years after-the-fact? They were caught being complicit in one of their own pros cheating a major contest. We have never received sufficient answers about this. There is no lawsuit filed anywhere. WHY can't we get closure here?
Don't know to much about the actual Girah scandal, never followed the Bluff Pro challenge after it finished even though I was involved during it. So can't comment to much.
But I'm pretty sure the final outcome was the current one. Not sure how they got there or what happened to get there. But to me the final solution was the currect one, and all people are looking now is more ammo against Girah and Lock.
Nobody is looking for "more ammo". We are looking for the truth.
Girah chip-dumped in a super-obvious fashion to win the contest on the final day. Lock then awarded him the prize, and never questioned anything until a public outrage occurred over the matter.
So this means that Lock is either incredibly stupid and incompetent (to not notice one of the most obvious chip dumps and contest cheatings ever) or intentionally complicit in allowing the cheating to have taken place. Either way, Lock needs to let everyone know the truth as to what happened, and stop sweeping this under the rug.
8) WHY doesn't Lock attempt to satisfy the 2+2 community, in order to get their high-producing ads back on the site? Does Lock hate money? Or do they realize they can't satcisfy the community with lies and obfuscation?
8.) Lock can't satcisfy the 2+2 community with the truth.
Lock has not told the truth. That's why nobody is satisfied.
Tell me, have you seen evidence of any of the crap Lock is handing out? Or are you just believing third parties (such as Jennifer) who tell you stories? I think it's the latter.
*I would like to say I do work for lock on some scale, I am not a lock rep and have posted this off my own back. So anything stated above isn't official statements or anything. I have just tried to answer the main questions as best I can. If anyone has any further questions or feels I am missing anything I will try and answer further, but if people are just going to pick apart my opinion on the facts I have, or question my honesty, don't expect a reply.
I look forward to your answers, but please come back with something of substance, rather than just repeating company lines without addressing the actual points.
Poker* and living in a fantasy land are the only 2 things Gank seems to be good at.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
"O I'm going to Wall Street to become a broker because I'm a lot older than most interns, don't have a degree and have zero experience. If that doesn't work out I'll be a teacher, because nothing schools love more than a bum with no skills outside of poker teaching kids stuff."
*And I'm no longer sure about the poker.
That means in 2013 Jennifer Larson should have taken them to meet at a local park and require each bring a dish to pass to celebrate their fail this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Nobody will discuss the Portugal trip. I wouldn't be surprised if Jen said we will still have it but nobody can discuss this at our time of crisis.
Lock are professional Bullshitters and nothing more. It's a shame some of these Pros are have such clouded judgement after this long. Do people really think stuff will be better in 3-4 weeks time from a site on the decline as far as traffic? It's not the same thing but it's like when Jasep said he would give out monthly distributions everyone knew that was 100% pure BS as well.
Surely a majority of their traffic right now is made up of the same players playing with very little new deposits coming in. I'd encourage everyone NOT to play until Lock starts paying out since by playing all they are giving them is a freeroll.
No other site has a policy like this. The big problem is the fact that users cannot cash out funds from transfers. If this is true, it means Lock is simply stealing that money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I think you will find Pokerstars have the exact same policy we are argueing over. Lock just have a similar one. But the one that you actually quoted is straight from Pokerstars terms. word for word. I also think you will find a few other sites have a similar policy to PokerStars. Lock being one.
I have gave you the answers to the best of my knowledge. But I think its clear that you don't want answers, you are looking for material to use. But to be honest you can ask the same questions over and over, it doesn't change the truth. Even if its not the answers you are looking for.
But I won't be commenting anymore on this forum or answering anymore here. You can come talk to me where I know who I am talking to if you have any more questions.
Dear Lock insider, if policies around transfer cashouts are clear why can't you use them to answer this question?
I transfer $5000 to player B. Player B plays for a few months and runs it down to $3500. Who owns that $3500? Who can cash it out, what is the process of doing it.
My interpretation of the policy wording you posted is that Lock simply steals this money. Do you agree?
Stop comparing Lock's bullshit cashout "policy" to Stars cashout policy, you make yourself look like a fucking moron. It is not similar or alike or even resembling it in any single fucking way. Stars lets you cashout transferred funds with some pretty minimal playthrough requirements while Lock doesn't allow you to cash out transferred funds AT ALL. Big fucking difference there Einstein.Quote:
Originally Posted by g9oltNo other site has a policy like this. The big problem is the fact that users cannot cash out funds from transfers. If this is true, it means Lock is simply stealing that money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I think you will find Pokerstars have the exact same policy we are argueing over. Lock just have a similar one. But the one that you actually quoted is straight from Pokerstars terms. word for word. I also think you will find a few other sites have a similar policy to PokerStars. Lock being one.
I have gave you the answers to the best of my knowledge. But I think its clear that you don't want answers, you are looking for material to use. But to be honest you can ask the same questions over and over, it doesn't change the truth. Even if its not the answers you are looking for.
But I won't be commenting anymore on this forum or answering anymore here. You can come talk to me where I know who I am talking to if you have any more questions.
Please show me where we said "We don't allow you to cashout AT ALL."Quote:
Originally Posted by nunbeater
We told the few accounts that where abusing the transfer system that they can't cashout transfered funds. But this was only a few accounts.
But please tell me the differance between what Pokerstars says and what Lock says to actual poker players accounts. (Using what we ay to fraudulent accounts doesn't count, also what other people are saying also doesn't count.)
But please tell me the difference between Pokerstars policy and Locks. (As I said before please don't use hearsay in your argument.)
You know what? Don't even bother with the few accounts that were abusing the policy theory bullshit because it was pretty clear after reading thousands of posts that Lock suspended and cancelled EVERYONE'S cashout. I don't even like replying to that point because it's a bullshit excuse, Lock is broke and can't pay players so they make up some bullshit about some people "abusing" the p2p transfer system. If they fucking cashed out people like they should be able to there wouldn't be any fucking "abuse" in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by g9oltPlease show me where we said "We don't allow you to cashout AT ALL."Quote:
Originally Posted by nunbeater
We told the few accounts that where abusing the transfer system that they can't cashout transfered funds. But this was only a few accounts.
But please tell me the differance between what Pokerstars says and what Lock says to actual poker players accounts. (Using what we ay to fraudulent accounts doesn't count, also what other people are saying also doesn't count.)
But please tell me the difference between Pokerstars policy and Locks. (As I said before please don't use hearsay in your argument.)
It is very well documented on 2p2 where Lock told many players that they would not be allowed to cashout transferred funds AT ALL. Reading comprehension bro. Although if you want to get technical Lock hasn't yet told people that they can't cash out at all, they have just stopped cashing people out. As a matter of fact there are several 2p2ers that received email stating that not only could they not cash out transferred funds they would not be able to cashout WINNINGS DERIVED FROM TRANSFERRED FUNDS.
That is a far cry from Pokerstars cashout policy which requires you to playthrough and rake something like 15 VPPS for every hundred dollars if you want to cashout transfers.
Keep showing your ignorance though.
It's amazing how blinded Lock employees/pros have become. Jennifer must be a master of deception. Even in the face of a mound of evidence that Lock is not paying anyone, but possibly them, they still do their part to try and bail the sinking ship with their empty can of chicken soup.
Look at the simple question I asked. Why is it the Lock rep will not touch it? Could it be that there is no explanation that doesn't point towards Lock being shady?