You're not even kidding.Originally Posted by UseHerName
Calvin Ayre reported years ago that Lock was being run from Jen Larson's condo when it first went up.
You're not even kidding.
Calvin Ayre reported years ago that Lock was being run from Jen Larson's condo when it first went up.
Well, this is interesting. Just checked Pokernewsboy. The Superwins page is gone, but Lock is still listed as a "featured room".
I'm not in Gerry's head, but I suppose one could think Lock was on the up and up (that there isn't theft going on) but still have reservations about the site. This will be my last post on Gerry's involvement, because I'm not Gerry, so I'll be very brunt: Gerry is a high-quality individual who many people (myself included) feel is making a very bad decision. I wish he would just break off from Lock, because he is a very honest person, and even if we all think he is 100% wrong he believes what he says, he's not just saying things.
I won't disown a friend because he is making what I think is a serious mistake. I do not condone his role with Lock Poker (and have told him so for quite some time), and I'm disappointed that he still has Lock ads up on PNB, but if I washed my hands of every friend who made a bad choice I'd have zero friends. Gerry thinks he is doing the right thing (and not just for himself) and he has his reasons, he is not maliciously doing anything. His intentions are good even if his actions don't particularly demonstrate that to others.
As to taking things down: Honestly, I know PFO was going in a different direction already and this latest incident probably hastened the new direction. I've also rationalized it to Gerry and he has removed any link to the "very suspect" (my words not his) SuperWins on PNB. I had hoped he would take down the Lock ads as well (and he still might), but since I have not been a part of PNB since December and no longer contribute there it's not much of a concern of mine --the site has been completely inactive since mid-December fwiw.
I've said my peace about Lock, I wouldn't direct anyone to the site and actively dissuade people from joining the site, I do not think they are solvent, and there have been far too many red flags, especially in the past year or so.
I write things about poker at my Poker Blog and elsewhere on the Internets
I just don't see how you could be giving Gerry any credit for believing there is even a 1% chance Lock is legit at this point.
Anyone with enough industry awareness to run a successful affiliate site should also be able to see the Lock situation clearly.
You keep saying that he's a great guy, but a great guy wouldn't keep pushing people towards Lock Poker so they can get scammed (and so he can get a piece of their stolen money).
How does he explain the 10/10 review he gave them on Pokernewsboy -- something that still exists? Wouldn't it at least be ethical of him to severely lower the review, and post a clear warning that Lock hasn't paid out many cashouts dating back to 2012?
An ethical person would never intentionally steer innocent people into a scam, and that's exactly what Gerry is doing.
I am guessing that Lock probably has a generous affiliate deal with him, and he doesn't want to give that up.
I really hope you don't believe the nonsense that Gerry still believes in them. He doesn't. He believes in fattening his own wallet at the expense of future scam victims.
Still wondering why it doesn't bother you to have your full name associated with both sites when they are actively promoting Lock, especially since it appears to an outside observer that you might be the owner (even though I believe you're not).
Also LOL @ the bonus deals of 200% up to $4000.
Yeah, that's not indicative at all of a site trying to steal.
How do you know it doesn't bother me? How do you know I haven't wrestled with this for days, weeks, or months?
The only site I am slightly active on that belongs to Gerry no longer has any ads, links, or anything to Lock Poker or Superwins. And even with that I am torn over whether I will continue on at the site if Lock ads remain at PNB btw, because yes it does bother me despite what you might think.
And you can pretend I am somehow complicit in promoting Lock Poker because of a tertiary relationship to a site I used to write for, but I'm not a Lock affiliate, never have been, and haven't offered up anything but negative thoughts on the site in a year, when my opinion of the company went completely to shit.
I told Gerry a year ago I didn't want anything to do with Lock and wouldn't write any more articles about the site, and when their "cashouts will get better" response after their retreat never happened I progressively reduced my workload at PNB and I severed ties entirely in December. And even before this kerfuffle I lobbied to get the Lock banner removed from PFO entirely.
I may not take to the forums to declare my outrage, and I'm a bit more measured in my reactions to things, but I've done more than you think I have, I just go about it in a different way. It wasn't your outrage, or 2+2 that got the Superwins page at PNB removed, and it wasn't your posts that got the lock banner removed at PFO several months ago.
When you think about, I've probably done more to rid the internet of Lock Poker ads than you have.
I write things about poker at my Poker Blog and elsewhere on the Internets
"Gerry is a high-quality individual who many people (myself included) feel is making a very bad decision."
Ummm Steve-O, that's a nice way to sugarcoat it, but the truth is Gerry is a low quality individual making an immoral decision, despite being fully aware of the current situation. And I think I speak for many players when I say this: if I happen to pass him on the street in the future I can't say I would hesitate to knock him the fuck out.
I've included warnings about Lock(ed Balances) Poker in some of the PPA Weekly Updates. Anyone have a list of sites with Lock (or related) banners?
Glad to hear this is being done. Perhaps someone can compile a list of affiliates for Lock Poker and post them here (and 2+2), and then Engineer can release this list in his PPA bulletin.
Not that I want to get into a "who has done more to thwart Lock" pissing contest, but which sites have you gotten Lock removed from, aside from two that you were already heavily involved with content generation?How do you know it doesn't bother me? How do you know I haven't wrestled with this for days, weeks, or months?
The only site I am slightly active on that belongs to Gerry no longer has any ads, links, or anything to Lock Poker or Superwins. And even with that I am torn over whether I will continue on at the site if Lock ads remain at PNB btw, because yes it does bother me despite what you might think.
And you can pretend I am somehow complicit in promoting Lock Poker because of a tertiary relationship to a site I used to write for, but I'm not a Lock affiliate, never have been, and haven't offered up anything but negative thoughts on the site in a year, when my opinion of the company went completely to shit.
I told Gerry a year ago I didn't want anything to do with Lock and wouldn't write any more articles about the site, and when their "cashouts will get better" response after their retreat never happened I progressively reduced my workload at PNB and I severed ties entirely in December. And even before this kerfuffle I lobbied to get the Lock banner removed from PFO entirely.
I may not take to the forums to declare my outrage, and I'm a bit more measured in my reactions to things, but I've done more than you think I have, I just go about it in a different way. It wasn't your outrage, or 2+2 that got the Superwins page at PNB removed, and it wasn't your posts that got the lock banner removed at PFO several months ago.
When you think about, I've probably done more to rid the internet of Lock Poker ads than you have.
You said that your opinion of Lock went to shit about a year ago. That is likely accurate, as I remember debating with you about Lock when this site first went up in early 2012. I was insisting back then that Lock was uber-shady, and I wasn't just taking a lucky guess. They had committed so many acts of fraud and dishonesty by that point, I felt that advising people to stay away was a no-brainer. You didn't seem so sure, and in fact questioned a lot of my conclusions at the time.
But let's stick to the present.
I don't know how you feel internally about Gerry being in bed with Lock. You claim it bothers you, and it's very possible you're telling the truth. I still don't understand why you don't ask Gerry (who is your friend) to take your name down from the articles on those sites. When people deposit to Lock through Gerry's link and get their money stolen, do you really want them going back there and blaming you? Because it appears to the casual observer that you are at least a part-owner there, even if that's not true.
I also feel that removing your name from all past contributions to pokerforums and pokernewsboy would be a strong statement to those observing, and might actually be the tipping point to finally shame Gerry into taking all of those links down.
From a simple Google search, I have found the following affiliate sites still providing links and promotions to sign up to Lock, with no warning about Lock's longtime, ongoing issues with paying people:
Rakebrain: www.rakebrain.com/lock-poker.php
HighStakesDB: www.highstakesdb.com/rakeback-lockpoker.aspx
Rakemeback: http://www.rakemeback.com/rake-back-...keback/
RakebackNation: www.rakebacknation.com/lock-poker-rakeback/
LockPokerBonus (LOL): www.lockpokerbonus.com/lock-poker-rakeback/
poker.org: www.poker.org/lock-poker/
poker.com: www.poker.com/rakeback/lock-poker.htm
pokersites.us: www.pokersites.us/lock-poker/
There are tons more. These are the top 8 that I found on google.
And of course, there's still Pokernewsboy promoting Lock as the "featured room" with a 10/10 review.
It appears that Superwins has no more affiliates at the moment, as Gerry was the only one and removed it.
Thanks Druff.
LOL. More like BonusForLockPoker or LockPoker'sBonus :-(
How can you all forget CardPlayer?Thanks Druff.
LOL. More like BonusForLockPoker or LockPoker'sBonus :-(
Oops. I totally meant to type Cardplayer, and then forgot before I hit Submit.How can you all forget CardPlayer?
Cardplayer: www.cardplayer.com/online-poker-bonus/33-lock-poker
BTW, the print ads for Lock are gone from the magazine, as are the Lock banners from the website. I assume Lock can no longer afford to pay for advertising, so now they are simply an affiliate link on the site (which is still bad, obviously).
I assume they didn't have any kind of fallout with Lock, or the affiliate link would have been removed, too.
This is a good review of Superwins and the type of review Gerry should publish. Of course he might risk losing out on sports tickets or dinner from Jennifer Larson if he does.
http://www.safestpokersites.com/superwins-poker-review/
Highlight:
What I like about Superwins – Nothing
Y'know, if you look around the industry and see all the people who have drunk Jen Larson's kool-aid (an unfortunate Jonestown Tragedy reference), it's kind of amazing all the people who formerly had good reps who are now ruined because they've stuck by her.
All I can say is she must be one hell of a confidence artist and trickster.
Just want to say +1 to Mr. Druff for the links and also...
Got the ball rolling on this and hopefully will be a part of a future webcast to continue to spread the word. Also got wind of an extensive article about to be published on this subject. Should be good to see it properly highlighted.
There is no kool-aid and no "sticking with her". You are trying to romance this up.
This has nothing to do with folks believing in anything more than a quick buck.
Times are lean for these affiliates. The affiliate deal is probably very generous. The proper amount to get these financially stressed "good folk" to become accessories to theft.
No salesmanship. The "good folks" and Jen simply agreed to do business.
You give too much credit to Jen. She doesn't have to work too hard to find people willing to cheat for the quick buck.
It's the way of the world.
I'm going to go the middle route on this one.There is no kool-aid and no "sticking with her". You are trying to romance this up.
This has nothing to do with folks believing in anything more than a quick buck.
Times are lean for these affiliates. The affiliate deal is probably very generous. The proper amount to get these financially stressed "good folk" to become accessories to theft.
No salesmanship. The "good folks" and Jen simply agreed to do business.
You give too much credit to Jen. She doesn't have to work too hard to find people willing to cheat for the quick buck.
It's the way of the world.
Indeed, a lot of the "I believe in Lock" crap was financially motivated. Many of Lock's biggest believers were either broke poker pros or cold/greedy assholes who didn't give a fuck about anyone else, as long as the checks kept rolling in.
At the same time, I do believe that Jen was good at being likable in person, and in fact presented a "family" atmosphere for those associated with Lock. She fostered an environment of, "I care about all of you, so please care about Lock in return." A lot of morons bought into this, especially ones who needed the money and it was much easier to err on the side of believing her rather than look too closely as to what was really happening.
Gank was a great example of this.
He was never a friend of mine, but I got to know him over the years somewhat, and I concluded that he was mostly a principled guy. He put a lot of time and effort into the Occupy Las Vegas movement, even getting himself arrested, just because he felt what he was doing was right. I don't agree with the Occupy movement or most of its message, but I can at least give credit to some of its participants for putting a lot of effort into what they thought was right. Gank also was fairly outspoken about the AP/UB scandal, and was very quick to criticize Mark Seif and many other pros associated with that company.
So why did Gank stay with Lock for so long, despite all that was happening?
I am convinced it was a combination of needing the money and truly believing the shit that Jen was shoveling at him. Now, if Gank was a millionaire, I'm sure he would have ditched Lock at the first sign of trouble. But he seemed to trust Jen, and that allowed him to look at the situation with rose colored glasses for awhile, especially because the consequences (losing out on the money) were not as pleasant as continuing to trust her. Basically, I'm saying that Gank wasn't staying with Lock out of greed, but because he subconsciously forced himself to believe Jen for his own good. Once the evidence became too overwhelming, and once friends he respected got on his ass about it, he finally made the right decision and left. Unlike other pros who left quietly, Gank at least was honest that he left because the site didn't appear to be operating honestly.
Unfortunately, most of the other Lock pros weren't as socially conscious as Gank, and just stayed on because they needed/wanted the money, and they didn't give a shit if others suffered because they were promoting a scam.
I always thought that Steve was the owner of both PNB and PFO. I see now that that's not the case, but that's certainly how it looks. I would not want my name all over that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote