You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Comments
I'm not sure how there can be a grey area here?
if he has got two sky cant really do anything about it
rich has 2 acc tikay has 2 acc this is not a dig at them but if sky let any1 have 2 acc nomatter who it be there leaving themself open for 1 rule for 1 1 for anther which is not on i dont not have a problem if any1 has more acc ........... but i can see how it matters with cash gl 2 u all
p.s. is the player......... rumpelstiltskin......lol sorry bad bit of humor
Sky Poker fund an Account for all the PTP-ers. I play on this Site most nights of the week, & only use "TIKAY10" on my PTP evenings.
The clue is in the names of my two Accounts - "TIKAY10" & "tikay1", which hardly sounds like an attempt to decieve. The PTP Account aliases of all the PTP-ers follow the same pattern.
None of this can be construed in any way as "one rule for one, one rule for others".
As to the thrust of the thread, I think we should not anticipate how Sky Poker are handling this. They ARE aware of the allegation, because it was sent to them a week ago.
It is only right & proper that they investigate the matter thoroughly, & we don't have a trial by Forum, with a mob mentality pre-empting the outcome.
If the allegation were made about YOU, or ME, the very least we would wish & expect is that Sky Poker investigated the matter with great care, rather than bowing to speculation, some of which is or may be ill-informed.
The Rules on Multi-Accounting are quite clear, as a few now-Banned players on this site, one or two of them high-profile, who subsequently played the martyr card to great effect, know to their cost.
But natural justice MUST be fair, & that it not something that can be ascertained instantly, & it would be wrong if it were.
Please don't think I'm pro Multi-Accounting - I'm quite the opposite, as most players well know, & when I suspect M-A, I report it. Always.
As HAL says, though, if this person is multi-accounting, he's doing it to exploit the rest of the players on the site as he has tonnes of information on them, where the rest of the players are blissfully unaware of how he plays due to the new name.
WD Scotty for bringing this into the public eye, clearly not enough is being done about it and the Community catching wind of it should hopefully give sky a kick up the a*s to get it sorted.
But there should be no reason why anyone else would need to operate two or more accounts.
PS - Good to share that Hi-Lo Table with you last night, what great fun that was!
This thread is serving no good purpose. Sky Poker ARE fully aware of the allegation, are investigating it thoroughly & properly, & they do not knowingly allow Multi-Accounting.
Naming and shaming is against the forum rules, if you wish to read them, please click here, thank you
And Scotty DID deal with it through the proper channels, in the proper way. FACT. That he then chose to start this Thread is a matter that you should take up with him. Just a thought.
Even if you can prove that the 2 players have a similar style, live in the same town, even play from the same IP address...... You still have not proved Multi Accounting
If there is a 2nd account then the likely hood is this is in a second name, different bank, possibly even a different sex of player. You may know there playing from the same address but how can you PROVE that it's the same person sitting at the computer??
And if were talking about site bans and funds being confiscated then i think you have to be able to PROVE that one person is using both accounts.
What if a guy and his girlfriend both have accounts from the same address, then sky leap in without propper investigation and freeze the funds of these players for doing nothing apart from living together. They may have similar styles as one taught the other to play, they would have the same address as they live together, but htey have committed no breach of the rules
I'm not saying that your wrong and the 2 accounts are not the same person, but if the player ahs set up an account in his/ hers other halfs name then how do you PROVE there one and the same??
Great Post by ACESOVER.
I am speaking personally, & Sky Poker probably don't approve of my open-ness, but I feel strongly on this.
I utterly abhor Multi-Accounting for the sake of deception. Anyone who knows even a tinsy bit about me, & my actions with regard to it here & elsewhere, well knows that. I actually reported a suspected case of Multi-Accounting here a while back - through the proper channels - & the geezer had his account frozen, & he got himself Banned. Then the usual "martyr" thread started, & after an accusation on this Forum, I openly acknowedged that I had reported him. Two subsequent posts here said I was a "grass", & a "snitch", & I got brutally savaged for it on an alternative Forum. Now we want to "name & shame"! I mean, for goodness sake, people need to grow up, & leave that "grass" nonsense to the primary school playgrounds, where it belongs.
But.......
Sky Poker MUST be fair to the accused, too. It is extremely hard to prove "beyond reasonable doubt" - if we think about it, it's a nightmarishly difficult thing to prove. And in judging whether there should be a "name & shame" expose, & if the Lynch Mob who always coat-tail these threads get their way - "BAN HIM NOW, HE'S DEFFO GUILTY, A BLOKE WHO I KNOW SAID SO" sorta thing just reviles me. What if it were US that were accused, & we were stone-cold innocent? We would wish & hope that Sky Poker deliberated carefully, before just knee-jerk snap-banning us & with-holding our money. Do we really want to be judged by random Posters on a Forum, or by those who have access to the under-the-radar information?
"Fair & reasonable" cuts both ways. And so does properly considered justice.
FWIW, I understand why Scotty (who has become a Luton pal of mine in "real-life") started the thread. He feels strongly & passionately about the matter - just as I do - & he's frustrated that from where he stands, it appears that no action has been taken. But he does not actually know what Sky Poker are doing about the allegations. As a statement of fact, they ARE fully aware, & are dealing with the matter exactly as Scotty or myself would wish allegations about him or me were dealt with - with great care, & taking into account ALL the facts.
As acesover has said if he taught his girlfreind how to play then playing styles would be the same, just so you know i DO NOT AGREE with multi accounting.
Thankfully, despite some of the more extreme Posts on this thread, the days of lynch mobs have long past. Thank goodness.
And in a place of work, the accused would have legal rights, & if the procedures were not correctly followed, the case would FAIL.
Please (not you, Mr Lozgo), trust them on this. The matter IS being properly dealt with, & it is being dealt with right now. Honest 'injun.