Absolute Poker to FINALLY admit their site was compromised.

AceHigh Pino · #1 10-19-2007, 04:42 AM

(yes I know it was posted in another AP thread....thought this might clear it up and be easier to find, lol)

From Pocket Fives earlier:

*official P5's thread here*

Quote:

PocketFives just received a phone call from Absolute Poker confirming the suspicions of the online poker community over the past month. While we need to be vague in this post to respect their wishes, we can say that their systems were compromised, and that they are prepared to provide the details in a statement coming shortly.

Part of the statement will include a plan to refund players affected by this compromise.

We are extremely relieved to hear this outcome, as our most important goal in all this is to see justice given to those who were cheated in this process. Pocketfives is extremely proud to have played a part in the process of uncovering the impropriety that has occurred. We would of course like to thank all the other parties who played a key role in this process—specifically the folks that have been posting here and at twoplustwo.com.

This is great news for everyone. Keep your eyes out for the statement.

Extremely Relieved,

--Adam

PKing · #2 10-19-2007, 05:10 AM

Everyone that I have talked to have said that there is WAY more to this story that is set to come out. It will be interesting to see how much Absolute divulges in their statement..

LadyHoldem · #3 10-19-2007, 05:29 AM

Any Idea where they will be releasing their statement? Their press page seems to be dormant..

PKing · #4 10-19-2007, 05:41 AM

I imagine they will probably release it to Pocketfives.com, and Mark Seif might post it on his blog on Bluff Magazine. Pocketfives would be my bet.

ThePokerBank · #5 10-19-2007, 07:23 AM

Is this whole thing becoming familiar to the general public, or is it just the regular die-hard players that visit forums that are in the know about problems at Absolute?

LadyHoldem · #6 10-19-2007, 08:12 AM

Well, I'm still the one telling my news junkie husband about it, though it was in the times and the register.. and Poker-King.com made it to digg page one, I believe another story on the subject did as well..

My husband seriously watches or listens the news 4+ hours a day, and he hadn't heard about it. Perhaps it depends where you get your news?

SixPak · #7 10-19-2007, 09:50 AM

Let's be honest about this. I had a thread closed because i told about the leak of info i nthat excel file.

Now the are comming clean people finally belive. Even Jeremy has made a rickroll in his blog about the scandal.

But im still waiting for a ban because this whole story is as dodgy as one can be. To be honest why no ban/temporay ban of absolute from paw???

The almighty dollar is not everything!

Randy · #8 10-19-2007, 10:19 AM

I'm amazed by webmasters who want to take the moral high ground and insist that other webmasters ban programs from their sites. As if deciding who to promote and who not to promote on their own site isn't enough work to do, they have to berate others for doing something different or for waiting until more facts come to light.

Maybe someday these morally superior webmasters can also tell us who to vote for in the next election too?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SixPak

Let's be honest about this. I had a thread closed because i told about the leak of info i nthat excel file.

Now the are comming clean people finally belive. Even Jeremy has made a rickroll in his blog about the scandal.

But im still waiting for a ban because this whole story is as dodgy as one can be. To be honest why no ban/temporay ban of absolute from paw???

The almighty dollar is not everything!

SixPak · #9 10-19-2007, 10:29 AM

i dont ensist on others to do anything but working with lets say a rogue room is not something i would ever offer to my visitors. And if you want to be an authority in the affiliateworld why shouldent they keep their partners in check Randy.

PAW is not only a webmaster site so i actual fail to see your point.

but yes i dont use paw right now as an 'affiliate' but ive actual considered it for a long time as it was hard to keep negotiating private deals.

So I actual expect paw like to hear my opinion - then they can take it or leave it. And i dont expect nothing else.

Randy · #10 10-19-2007, 10:32 AM

Okay, here's my point, simplified. You (presumably) have a website, and you get to decide who to feature and not feature there. You get to decide who's a rogue and who's not.

So do the people who own and operate PAW. They get to decide who's a rogue and who's not. And they get to do it in their timeframe, not yours.