Collusion?

[nekoneko]

Let the Witch Hunt begin !   soon in theaters around you

[pirahn]

---

wrote:

@ChapInAChair

I think you have misunderstood. I'll let @pirahn consider my response and if he's still not cool with me, I'll try and straighten things out with him, probably by PM, to avoid further misunderstandings by third parties.

---

@Betzcom You have a select memory. Your first post also reported @Psycho79 for collusion. It ended with 

"So please check these accounts and take the appropriate action, thanks."

For all i know pscho may be a master criminal, a double agent working for trump and putin, but you provided zero evidence and want unibet to take action. Thats not vigilant, just laziness to check any facts.

You really need to read @ChapInAChair post on collusion. Its accurate and informative. Its the kind of thing poker sites would be reluctant to say openly for the obvious reason it may encourage people to act in a certain way.

 

 

 

[pirahn]

---

@WuDuwrote:

---

wrote:

Let me remind us about why I started this thread. I saw some suspicious behaviour and reported it, with supporting evidence. I did not make baseless accusations or simply insist Unibet investigate so-and-so. I gave screenshots and reasons. As a result, 3 accounts were banned for collusion (I assume this is what is meant by "appropriate action"). I was duly thanked for my good deed, and encouraged to report further suspicious activity.

 

---

Very nice! 3 scammers less and Unibet actively monitoring further early AIPF to catch overlays in those qualifiers. I'll keep an eye open as well now...

 

 

@pirahn

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/stress-anxiety-depression/controlling-anger/

Wishing you the best to find the help you need.

Your posts want to make me kill myself. Maybe ill climb to the height of your ego and jump to the level of your iq, that should do the trick.

 

 

---

 

[Betzcom]

@pirahn, @Psycho79

I said I provided screenshots and reasons, which I did. I can't establish all the facts. That's the point of asking Unibet to check. Players notice suspicious activity and make referrals to Unibet, providing reasons and screenshots if possible. Then Unibet takes over. That's how it works, right? Also note that the thread's title has a question mark, inviting those with more knowledge to help enlighten, which some of you did, and subsequently confirmed by Unibet.

Appropriate action included punishing any accounts found to be guilty (which Unibet did), and also giving the all clear for those that were not (which they did). If Unibet had said my referral was frivolous and explained to me how, that would be one thing. But as it stands, I caught 3 colluders and thanked for my good deed.

Thank you for referring me to chapinachair's post, which obviously wasn't available to me at the time I made my referral.

 

[WuDu]

---

@pirahnwrote:

---

Your posts want to make me kill myself. Maybe ill climb to the height of your ego and jump to the level of your iq, that should do the trick.

---

---

 

Nerve's been struck? After seeing your booze-fueled, typo-filled, early-morning hissy fit, I'll give you serious props if you are even able to climb out of your executive chair past 6 PM on a regular weekday. 🤣

[jonny2192]

---

@WuDu wrote:

---

@pirahnwrote:

---

Your posts want to make me kill myself. Maybe ill climb to the height of your ego and jump to the level of your iq, that should do the trick.

---

---

 

Nerve's been struck? After seeing your booze-fueled, typo-filled, early-morning hissy fit, I'll give you serious props if you are even able to climb out of your executive chair past 6 PM on a regular weekday. 🤣

---

@pirahn doesnt really drink, he has one drink that lasts all night to be sociable.

@pirahn Has bought multiple people into UK tour events and given thousands in tickets to others, hes one of the most helpfull people you can meet but will fight hes corner when he feels hes in the right.

 @JeppeL please can you do an age verification on @WuDu because this is turning into playground stuff. :)

[pirahn]

---

wrote:

@pirahn, @Psycho79

I said I provided screenshots and reasons, which I did. I can't establish all the facts. That's the point of asking Unibet to check. Players notice suspicious activity and make referrals to Unibet, providing reasons and screenshots if possible. Then Unibet takes over. That's how it works, right? Also note that the thread's title has a question mark, inviting those with more knowledge to help enlighten, which some of you did, and subsequently confirmed by Unibet.

Appropriate action included punishing any accounts found to be guilty (which Unibet did), and also giving the all clear for those that were not (which they did). If Unibet had said my referral was frivolous and explained to me how, that would be one thing. But as it stands, I caught 3 colluders and thanked for my good deed.

Thank you for referring me to chapinachair's post, which obviously wasn't available to me at the time I made my referral.

 

---

A few people have tried to enlighten you, it seems without success. I'll give it one final try in terms which you may relate to:

Its perfectly fine to report to the police a burglary to which you were a witness.

What you cannot do is go to the police to ask your neighbour "Mr Burglar" to be investigated for criminal behaviour.

You cannot request the police to investigate Mr Smith and Mr Smitherson for both using "Smithy" as their nickname.

And you cannot report as criminal behaviour both "smithys" for being gay. In your opinion it may be unethical but it is not illegal and other people may even disagree that its unethical.

[jonny2192]

@Leo-Unibet Please can you ban this player, I think its an unfair advantage when they can offer these kind of sexual favours. how can ugly players compete?

 

[Betzcom]

@pirahn 

Thank you for your guidance. However, like chapinachair's post, this was not available to me at the time.

 What issues are we dealing with here? I think they are: 

Q1) Who decides the evidentiary requirements for a referral? and

Q2) Did my screenshots and reasons meet the evidentiary requirements? 

My answers to these questions would be: 

A1) Unibet; and

A2) Yes, as you should hopefully see by the end of this post.

I did not see anywhere that Unibet said the referral was frivolous. This implies the referral was valid and acceptable for them, even if you personally have a higher evidentiary standard.

As a result of my referral, 3 colluders were caught and punished, and 2 good guys were declared innocent. That's 5 good outcomes. A bad outcome would be e.g. a colluder being declared innocent, or an innocent person wrongly banned.

So justice was done. I didn't see any complaints from psycho79 after being declared innocent. I don't see any problem going forward, unless people make it so.

Thank you for trying to put things in terms you thought I would understand. Let me try to return the favour.

Citizens pay for the police service through their taxes. It is the job of the police to investigate suspicious activity and detect/determine whether or not a crime has been committed, not the citizens'.

So a citizen may go to the police if they see something they think is suspicious, even if they cannot say a crime has actually been committed. If the police think the matter warrants further investigation, they will do so. If they don't, they won't. If they think the report is frivolous (e.g. reasons given are really weak), they can tell the citizen as politely (or otherwise) as they so wish. They can also tell the citizen if they need to see more/stronger evidence if it's not frivolous, but not quite enough, yet, to warrant further investigation.

Therefore, consider the following:

A man goes to the police and reports suspicious activity. He gives photos/screenshots and reasons.

Scenario A

Police considers photos/screenshots and reasons, then responds: "Get out of here with your frivolous reports and stop wasting police time with your weak evidence."

Scenario B 

Police considers photos/screenshots and reasons, then responds: "We'll get back to you." [...later...] "Thanks for contacting us. 2 guys are innocent. They were just messing around. However, 3 guys were fraudsters who have been scamming innocent victims, but they are now no longer able to rob the community thanks to your vigilance. Keep up the good work. Please do report again if you see anything suspicious."

-----------------------

1) Scenario B means that the photos/screenshots and reasons met the official evidentiary requirements, yes?

2) Which of these 2 scenarios more closely resembles what happened with my referral?

 

[Betzcom]

@jonny2192

I saw your post after drafting my response to pirahn.

Would you consider being ugly/attractive enough to distract another player unethical (see rules below - perhaps wearing the mask is a neutralising factor)? (:-)

Unethical Play 24. Poker is an individual (not a team) game. Any action or chat intended to help another player is unethical and is prohibited. Unethical play, such as soft-play (playing less aggressively against a partner) and chip dumping (intentionally losing chips to a partner), may result in penalties, including seizure of funds from the offender's account and/or termination of the account. Unibet routinely reviews game play to look for violations of our rules and to ensure the integrity of our games. It may be necessary to withhold player winnings until the completion of game play reviews.

[pirahn]

I had the displeasure of reading up on  gentic disorder microdeletion 15q11.2 for reasons i should not divulge. How easy to get side tracked by those who choose not to understand instead of helping those who wish to understand.

[psrquack]

https://www.flushdraw.net/news/chop-chip-dump-stir-controversy-wpt-fallsview/