Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Internet Gambling > Internet Gambling
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 10-26-2005, 11:37 PM
jman220 jman220 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: No Poker Sept-May
Posts: 822
Default Re: Responses

[ QUOTE ]
1) Agreed

2) What if Sean dumped Dave's online chips (using Dave's account) to a 3rd party as another poster suggested, using a library computer??

3) I am not Sean, merely a friend of his (not a great one at that). This post is purely for pentantic puposes.

[/ QUOTE ]

2. You think this makes him uncatchable? Ok, so lets say Sean uses Dave's account to dump it to Scott. Scott takes a cut and gives the money to Sean. Dave sees that someone useed his account to withdraw money and play with it. He contacts the poker site. They see that the money was dumped mostly to one other player. Do you think that a huge sight like party poker doesn't know how to recognize chip dumping? So now Scott is implicated, and so is Sean, and on top of the underlying crime you can now add conspiracy. Look, there's certainly a chance that he can get away with it. Maybe even a good one depending on how much law enforcement will care. But your friend needs to figure out whether $700 is worth the chance of going to jail. This is definitely a crime.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-26-2005, 11:44 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Responses

Good post. Exactly what I was looking for.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-26-2005, 11:47 PM
Bradyams Bradyams is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 566
Default Re: Responses

[ QUOTE ]
2) What if Sean dumped Dave's online chips (using Dave's account) to a 3rd party as another poster suggested, using a library computer??

[/ QUOTE ]

You and your friends don't have much common sense.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-27-2005, 12:20 AM
dogmeat dogmeat is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1
Default Re: Responses

[ QUOTE ]
1) Agreed

2) What if Sean dumped Dave's online chips (using Dave's account) to a 3rd party as another poster suggested, using a library computer??

3) I am not Sean, merely a friend of his (not a great one at that). This post is purely for pentantic puposes.

To my knowledge no such form was signed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not Dogmeat, really, so don't be offended. I am just using his account to tell you that when you turn thirteen, you will probably have enough sense to:

1) Realize how stupid you have been
2) Quit when you are behind
3) Understand that money in the pot is no longer yours
4) Get on with your life
5) Not post sht like this here - especially crossposted!@

Signed,

really, I'm not Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-27-2005, 12:33 AM
Freudian Freudian is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 24
Default Re: Shady potential fraud and thievery (long)

I don't know what the current rate for common sense lessons is these days. But $700 for letting someone else use your poker account to allow that someone else try to pay back a $100 debt isn't all that steep.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-27-2005, 12:47 AM
TheHammer24 TheHammer24 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Changing my skirt
Posts: 335
Default Re: Responses

This is not TheHammer24, just a friend of his. I want to share his opinion with you on the matter. FWIW, there is a very high liklihood that this will work. This however does not make it a good idea. There is absolutely no way I risk the legal costs and the possible jail time, the head ache of always wondering if the Police are going to catch me is enough to not make me wnat to do it. But here's why it would most likely work:

1. Dave, realizing he owed him 700 dollars, may be a lot less likely to call the bank, call the police, etc. He got pwned, will realize this, and be done.

2. Law Enforcement Won't Care! 700 dollars! There are far more important money laundering cases out there. For them to invest resources into the investigation, court fees, public defender, etc. it would be easier to pay Dave the 700 dollars he lost.

3. Party Poker Barrier. Party Poker is not going to be super cooperative, and even if they were willing to help in an investigation, the police would be reluctant to go to them as they are over seas etc.

But that being said, don't do it. It's just stupid. Kick his ass and tell him to pay you. Morally, this is 100% justified, but in no way worth the headache.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-27-2005, 12:47 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Responses

Why is it so hard to believe this is not me? Its not. End of story.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-27-2005, 12:51 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Responses

Good post, thanks for a legit response (minus the annoying, and erroneous, mockery)
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-27-2005, 01:26 AM
spicychili spicychili is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 59
Default Re: Responses

Why doesnt Sean just kick Dave in the nuts?
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-27-2005, 01:55 AM
USCSigma1097 USCSigma1097 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 20
Default Re: Responses

Man,

That is one of the dumbest ideas i've ever heard. First of all, you will be prosecuted.

Second of all, here in South Carolina, you most certainly would have your ass beat. Repeatedly.

What kind of a woman are you that you can't go get the money? If the guys owes you money you say "Hey bro, I want one hundred bucks a week for the next two months" If he doesn't pay, you steal some of his stuff and sell it.

You certainly don't defraud a bank. They will most certainly stick it in you and break it off.

Sigma
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.