Poker God or Cheating Scum?
Poll
 | 6 votes (12.5%) | ||
| | 39 votes (81.25%) | ||
| | 6 votes (12.5%) |
48 members have voted
Quote: GandlerQuote: Puckerbutt
There is no way that is good service....
He did not even the see defendant, just "movement of curtains and lights"...
After eight minutes of knocking and ringing the doorbell, Verstandig retreated to his own vehicle. He left his lights and engine off and continued to watch the house to see what would happen next.
As he described it: “I then saw a male, meeting the description of the Defendant (whose description I know from viewing myriad photographs, viewing dozens of video recordings, and one personal meeting prior to this litigation), inside the House, standing atop the stairwell.
Verstandig added: “At this juncture, I returned to the door of the House, commenced to knock on the door and ring the doorbell interchangeably once again so as to announce my presence. I witnessed movements through a window curtain and noises drawing nearer to the door upon which I was knocking.”
Quote: gordonm888For anyone still maintaining a presumption of Postle's innocence, note the high integrity manner in which Postle is dealing with this situation.
I feel like he knows much more than hes ever let fly out of his mouth. If you watch his demeanor in this promotional videos for his poker tournament invention he is calm cool and smooth. Compare that to his interviews in the booth and hes the complete opposite. But his actions as of this point are most likely within his rights. Hes essentially pleading the 5th and hiding and not saying anything because he doesn't have to.
Quote: Puckerbutt
How shocking.
It’s exactly what Mike Postle did too. And it paid off I think.
agree. Though it’s disappointing as IMO the evidence is overwhelming that he cheated.Quote: billryanQuote: Puckerbutt
How shocking.
Quote: unJonagree. Though it’s disappointing as IMO the evidence is overwhelming that he cheated.Quote: billryanQuote: Puckerbutt
How shocking.
But it wasn't decided on the evidence
Rather on California law pertaining to whether gambling losses are actionable.
This is a situation where the plaintiff attorneys didn't familiarize themselves with that or come up with a legit counter law.
That will be their next move although they have been severely hobbled.
Postle has still the onus hanging over his head imo
Quote: darkozQuote: unJonagree. Though it’s disappointing as IMO the evidence is overwhelming that he cheated.Quote: billryanQuote: Puckerbutt
How shocking.
But it wasn't decided on the evidence
Rather on California law pertaining to whether gambling losses are actionable.
This is a situation where the plaintiff attorneys didn't familiarize themselves with that or come up with a legit counter law.
That will be their next move although they have been severely hobbled.
Postle has still the on us hanging over his head imo
Good points.
Quote: darkozQuote: unJonagree. Though it’s disappointing as IMO the evidence is overwhelming that he cheated.Quote: billryanQuote: Puckerbutt
How shocking.
But it wasn't decided on the evidence
Rather on California law pertaining to whether gambling losses are actionable.
This is a situation where the plaintiff attorneys didn't familiarize themselves with that or come up with a legit counter law.
That will be their next move although they have been severely hobbled.
Postle has still the onus hanging over his head imo
The onus for what? To prove he is innocent?
If the plaintiffs' attorneys weren't up to snuff, perhaps none of the good ones wanted to take the case, knowing there was no case.
Quote: billryanQuote: darkozQuote: unJonagree. Though it’s disappointing as IMO the evidence is overwhelming that he cheated.Quote: billryanQuote: Puckerbutt
How shocking.
But it wasn't decided on the evidence
Rather on California law pertaining to whether gambling losses are actionable.
This is a situation where the plaintiff attorneys didn't familiarize themselves with that or come up with a legit counter law.
That will be their next move although they have been severely hobbled.
Postle has still the onus hanging over his head imo
The onus for what? To prove he is innocent?
If the plaintiffs' attorneys weren't up to snuff, perhaps none of the good ones wanted to take the case, knowing there was no case.
To be clear the onus of the cheating allegations in relation to his future at Poker, not in a court of law
The Poker community believe he is a cheat and got a get out of jail free card
https://www.wired.com/story/stones-poker-cheating-scandal/https://www.wired.com/story/stones-poker-cheating-scandal/
link didn’t workQuote: jmillsGood write up of the case at Wired.
https://www.wired.com/story/stones-poker-cheating-scandal/https://www.wired.com/story/stones-poker-cheating-scandal/
Quote: heatmapYou know how when you get arrested and they say “you have the right to remain silent”? Well that applies to anyone who comes up and talks to you.
It’s exactly what Mike Postle did too. And it paid off I think.
Exactly, everyone here is and has been bashing him for staying quiet and "hiding".
There is zero good that would come from public appearances.
Nobody would believe any statement that he made, and it would just make him look more guilty (generally in the court of public opinion, ignoring scandals is the best option, if you open yourself up to endless interviews and social media posts, people remember).
I don't know whether he was 100% guilty or not (nobody does except for him and maybe Stones), but regardless if he did cheat or did not cheat, he handled this scandal 100% correctly.
Of course even if he never has a judgment issued against him, which seems likely, (and criminal charges will never happen, at least not against him directly, people need to get that out of their mind), his poker life is basically over, nobody will want to play with him again, even if its in a safe environment...… So this scandal has already damaged him for life..... He is going to have trouble being a "poker pro" when he is barred from many cardrooms and websites so the idea that he got off unscathed is incorrect (for those that said it, not directly towards you or your quote) ....
Quote: GandlerHe is going to have trouble being a "poker pro" when he is barred from many cardrooms and websites so the idea that he got off unscathed is incorrect (for those that said it, not directly towards you or your quote) ....
I doubt many card rooms will ban him. Thankfully people are now aware and can either play with him or not.
Quote: DRichI doubt many card rooms will ban him. Thankfully people are now aware and can either play with him or not.
dont forget he apparently only won at the live streaming events and did not so well when he played off camera... he probably is a fish
Quote: heatmapdont forget he apparently only won at the live streaming events and did not so well when he played off camera... he probably is a fish
Assuming that is true wouldn't people want to play with him?
Quote: DRichAssuming that is true wouldn't people want to play with him?
Hey you werent supposed to get it that quickly!
... and the newest poker scandal thats coming out is going to make mike postle look like a child
Quote: heatmapHey you werent supposed to get it that quickly!
... and the newest poker scandal thats coming out is going to make mike postle look like a child
What’s the latest??
Quote: ThatDonGuyBecause the address was repeated
This link works
Didn't work for me.
Quote: unJonWhat’s the latest??
this is the "proof" video i have it archived if it disappears but there is many poker "people" talking about it
"poker people talking about it"
basically real time solvers are used i think
“He won 62 of 69 for $277k. It’s 95% accurate.
Found more. He won $329k. 2+2 analytics guys are heroes.
Numbers prove his guilt. He cheated a dying man. It doesn’t matter what the numbers are he’s still guilty. We should start a fund to get accurate numbers.” - #ThePokerCommunity
When you cheat a casino you get prosecuted. Better to cheat other poker players, I guess, because the Postle case shows you can't get prosecuted and its difficult or impossible to win a civil suit. Sad.
Win if you can, lose if you must
but always, always cheat.
Quote: RigondeauxPretty fun debate is afoot. This does not involve poker superstars. However, it does involve midstakes games and substantial amounts of money for most people. e.g $5,000-10,000 pots.
Mike Postle is a veteran pro and he often plays on live streams. The streams are delayed by 20 mins, but people who understand the subject say it would be fairly easy to hack them.
After appearing in these games for years, people have started to ask if it is possible for Postle to really be this good.
A couple points. They say he is far and away the winningest player in the game. If a losing player, or wreckless player made these plays it would not be unheard of or even that odd. But some of these plays are, in a vacuum, absolutely terrible and unjustifiable. So why haven't they eaten up his win rate?
TODAY. GOOGLE NEWS TOUTS A WIRED MAGAZINE ARTICLE ON THE DISPUTE.
A Dozen défendants, demand for 330M in damages!!!!!
No trial date or discovery as yet!
Quote: FleaStiffTODAY. GOOGLE NEWS TOUTS A WIRED MAGAZINE ARTICLE ON THE DISPUTE.
A Dozen défendants, demand for 330M in damages!!!!!
No trial date or discovery as yet!
Giving new meaning to "Going Postle"
LOL.Quote: darkozGiving new meaning to "Going Postle"
I TRULY WOU;LD LIKE A TRIAL ON THIS. 330M SEEMS HIGH THOUGH.
Mike Postle's attorneys have filed a motion to end representation of him.
“Client [Postle] has failed to comply with the written agreement between the firm and the client"
in other words, Postle wasnt paying them?
However, the main comment that I wanted to make is now Postle is working on a defamation lawsuit. This is critical to point out to this thread, because many people are implying that he must prove his innocence (which is not how anything works). However, to win a defamation lawsuit (assuming there is no settlement), you must prove that the statements made against you are false, and that the false statement caused tangible harm (financial or reputation). If Postle is successful in his defamation claims (especially after the earlier dismissal) that is about as close to "proving his innocence" as you can get in the U.S. legal system.... There was a hearing on the 18th of this month, and it was continued (due to issues with counsel) for over a month.
I don't know if Postle cheated or did not. But, I have been one of the few voices on here to say that we should wait and see if there is evidence. And, so far there has not been. And, if he wins or settles his defamation action, that is about as close to proving one's innocence as you can get. (I am sure that still will not be enough for some).
I have seen many Youtubes on him (for the last year plus Postle play videos seemed to be the trend) of plays that are unorthodox, and strange, but that does not mean anything. I am sure you can go to any random poker table and film people making strange calls, raises, and folds either from not paying attention, feeling that they have a read, or just being frustrated. I have never seen anything that is a "smoking gun" . Of course I stand by my earlier comments, electronics, phones, and headgear should not be allowed at the table, and enforcing these simple rules would have prevented the alleged cheating and make it impossible for anyone to cheat using such methods..... But, in many poker rooms staff are reluctant to enforce rules regarding phones and electronics (not to mention headgear, which should never be worn inside in any circumstance in my view for both security and social reasons, medical gear aside obviously)..... It seems many people here are upset at alleged cheating, but also do not want rules strictly enforced that would make such cheating essentially impossible..... That is just my view, you cant have it both ways....
Quote: unJonI’m glad he filed a defamation lawsuit. Truth of the matter asserted is a defense to defamation and the defendants will get a bunch of discovery to try to establish he cheated.
No, defendants filed Anti-SLAPP motions and the cases will likely be dismissed with Postle responsible for the defendant's fees.
Ah. That’s a shame for us public with nothing but a puerile interest.Quote: sabreNo, defendants filed Anti-SLAPP motions and the cases will likely be dismissed with Postle responsible for the defendant's fees.
Quote: sabreNo, defendants filed Anti-SLAPP motions and the cases will likely be dismissed with Postle responsible for the defendant's fees.
And to add to that, his lawyers dropped him for lack-of-communication, which most likely means non payment. The guy is cheating trash.
I have seen enough evidence to know he was able to see other people's hole cards and he used that information to win money from them at the poker tables.Quote: Gandler
I don't know if Postle cheated or did not. But, I have been one of the few voices on here to say that we should wait and see if there is evidence.
Quote: michaelwilsonYou are right. But people who cheat must be punished 100%. And it is not only about gambling it's about everyday life. Why should someone spend money and time to win or lose and someone just not doing anything and wins. It looks pretty unfair to others.
Yes, it is a shame poker can't be more like real life, where everything is fair. Perhaps casinos could give everyone who sits down a trophy. That seems fair.
Quote: billryanYes, it is a shame poker can't be more like real life, where everything is fair. Perhaps casinos could give everyone who sits down a trophy. That seems fair.
I don’t agree at all with your snarky take. The guy cheated. One should expect that when entering a casino based poker tournament that the type of cheating that occurred would be prevented. A few posts back Axel summed it up well, and succinctly.
Quote: AxelWolfI have seen enough evidence to know he was able to see other people's hole cards and he used that information to win money from them at the poker tables.
I have not. And, this is California where they are eager to charge just about anyone with just about anything, so I am guessing the state has not either....
I am simply not comfortable labeling somebody a cheater based on some awkward plays, and people saying he won more than he should over a period of time.
Postle denies cheating, Stones's investigator denies that he cheated, and there have been no criminal charges or as of yet even successful civil actions (against Postle, I know there was a settlement with Stones, where they payed each of the players 600ish, though as part of the settlement it was stated that no cheating occurred on the part of the Stones), sorry the evidence is simply not there as far as being able to him a cheater (also the settlement had nothing to do with Mike Postle).
https://www.pokernews.com/news/2020/09/details-regarding-stones-kuraitis-postle-poker-settlement-37983.htm
https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article245724175.html
My question is, if you are going to cheat at poker why would you cheat at a recorded and streamed game where many people watch and will forever be online?
Let's grant for a moment all of the allegations, that Stones is in on it, the management was in on it etc... Why not play one of the many other games for the same stakes that are not streamed? It would be like a shoplifter choosing an aisle at a store where a news crew is filming to grab a candy bar and walk out.... It just makes no sense that the management would assist him in cheating in a streamed game when if this same thing happened at any other table nobody would care or be talking about it for the last two years....
Quote: gordonm888Postle is slime. People commit crimes in ways in which they seek to leave no "smoking gun" evidence. Therefore, observers who insist on "smoking gun evidence" before passing judgment on an obvious cheat deserve whatever life doles out to them. IMO.
This is a pretty bold and egregious statement. I guess people who believe in "innocent until proven guilty" have what is coming to them?
Especially as we are talking about a game.... Where somebody allegedly cheated in a game.... We are not talking about something that caused physical harm...
If you are talking about a serial killer who admitted to it and boasted about it to the news before a formal conviction that would be one thing. But, we are talking about a game, where some hands were played in odd ways that may or may not have been cheating.... This is not the Colorado Shooter we are talking about.... This is a dude who maybe cheated some people in a card game (maybe). This post is pretty out of line.....
Because the alleged method of cheating required that the hands be streamed. He was (allegedly) watching the stream in real time.Quote: GandlerMy question is, if you are going to cheat at poker why would you cheat at a recorded and streamed game where many people watch and will forever be online?
See above answer.Quote:Let's grant for a moment all of the allegations, that Stones is in on it, the management was in on it etc... Why not play one of the many other games for the same stakes that are not streamed? It would be like a shoplifter choosing an aisle at a store where a news crew is filming to grab a candy bar and walk out.... It just makes no sense that the management would assist him in cheating in a streamed game when if this same thing happened at any other table nobody would care or be talking about it for the last two years....
Innocent until proven guilty is a rule of evidence for a courtroom. It’s not broader than that.Quote:This is a pretty bold and egregious statement. I guess people who believe in "innocent until proven guilty" have what is coming to them?
Quote: unJonBecause the alleged method of cheating required that the hands be streamed. He was (allegedly) watching the stream in real time.
See above answer.
No, not if the casino was orchestrating it. Casinos can very easily place RFIDs in any chips or cards without anyone knowing. If the top level of the casino was planning this (which lets be honest is kind of far fetched that they would risk so much for so little gain....), they could easily insert such decks into any game Postle was playing and relay the information to his phone (or his hat device, or just que him via secret shock devices , or whatever others are claiming....). In fact this would be very easy for a casino and very few people would know. I find it very hard to believe that upper level management would plan this all out and put him into a live streamed game....
If a casino wanted to collude with Postle to cheat players for some reason there are probably endless better ways to accomplish this that have far less exposure (probably even far more than I realize).... The only reason we know about Postle is because people took the time to watch the countless hours of play and determine he won more than he should and makes some odd plays, if none of this was recorded (publicly) nobody would ever know...
This is one of the main reasons that I am skeptical on the casino orchestration claims, it just seems too blatant. I am sure if a casino for some motive (which is another issue, why would a casino risk so much on such little gain comparatively and so much potential negative backlash) wanted to back a cheater I am sure there are endless "better" ways.
Quote: unJonInnocent until proven guilty is a rule of evidence for a courtroom. It’s not broader than that.
Fair enough, but the overall principle is the same.
Generally in any field the person making the assertion has the burden to prove their assertion.
But, my primary issue with that poster is he seems to wish bad things on people who don't agree with him or choose to remain skeptical (which does not mean that I think he is innocent, just that I am not convinced of his guilt, certainly not with the fervor expressed by many on here, with many posts about what they want to do to Postle getting quite out of line.... for something that even if 100% of the allegations turn out to be 100% true, is just some dude cheating at mid stakes poker.... This is not a serial killer or some horrendous action, its a dude who maybe cheated at a card game.... People need to chill, its not the crime of the century.....)
Quote: GandlerII guess people who believe in "innocent until proven guilty" have what is coming to them?
Innocent until proven guilty is a standard associated with imprisioning someone -taking away their freedom by locking them in a jail cell. The standard of proof for such a penalty is understandably high.
BUT, no where else in life does "Innocent until proven guilty" apply. If Postle had had some merchandise endorsements, he would have been have been dropped and shunned by all his sponsors - they absolutely do not need iron-clad proof of his guilt to drop him like a turd.
And citing that "Postle has stated he was not cheating" is meaningless.
O.J. Simpson still claims that he did not kill his wife. Jerry Sandusky still claims that he did not sodomize those 11 young boys in the Penn State athletic facilities.. Rick Pitino states that he knew nothing about those prostitutes that were hired by his assistants and brought into the Louisville athletic dorm for parties for his players. And Pitino states he knew nothing about those illegal cash payments to his players by his staff.
Seven years later, former Baylor football coach Art Briles still states that he knew nothing about the 56 allegations of rape made by women against his players (some of them gang rapes in the athletic dorm).
Just because we can't discover enough evidence to imprison Simpson, Pitino, Briles and Postle doesn't mean that we believe their denials. There is something called "personal judgment" and we are allowed to exercise it when we see circumstantial evidence that is compelling and overwhelming. We can shun people who have done despicable things.
Sports of all types have a "Cover-up and deny" culture when it comes to cheating and bad personal behavior. The credo is: "Never leave written or video evidence and always Deny Deny Deny" Given that kind of culture what is your expectation? Courts find that people almost always deny their guilt in public statements - and so they give Zero weight to such denials. Zero point zero weight. What do you expect Postle to do? Subject himself to criminal prosecution and ruinous lawsuits by publicly stating: "Yes, I cheated!" History has shown that when you stick a microphone in front of someone that everyone - the innocent and the guilty - will DENY, DENY, DENY. There is literally no incentive to do otherwise.
So, why would any observer give weight to the fact that Postle states he didn't cheat?? Those claims mean nothing. He will say that with 100% certainty whether he is innocent or guilty. Gandler, can't you understand that?
Quote: gordonm888Innocent until proven guilty is a standard associated with imprisioning someone -taking away their freedom by locking them in a jail cell. The standard of proof for such a penalty is understandably high.
BUT, no where else in life does "Innocent until proven guilty" apply. If Postle had had some merchandise endorsements, he would have been have been dropped and shunned by all his sponsors - they absolutely do not need iron-clad proof of his guilt to drop him like a turd.
And citing that "Postle has stated he was not cheating" is meaningless.
O.J. Simpson still claims that he did not kill his wife. Jerry Sandusky still claims that he did not sodomize those 11 young boys in the Penn State athletic facilities.. Rick Pitino states that he knew nothing about those prostitutes that were hired by his assistants and brought into the Louisville athletic dorm for parties for his players. And Pitino states he knew nothing about those illegal cash payments to his players by his staff.
Seven years later, former Baylor football coach Art Briles still states that he knew nothing about the 56 allegations of rape made by women against his players (some of them gang rapes in the athletic dorm).
Just because we can't discover enough evidence to imprison Simpson, Pitino, Briles and Postle doesn't mean that we believe their denials. There is something called "personal judgment" and we are allowed to exercise it when we see circumstantial evidence that is compelling and overwhelming. We can shun people who have done despicable things.
Sports of all types have a "Cover-up and deny" culture when it comes to cheating and bad personal behavior. The credo is: "Never leave written or video evidence and always Deny Deny Deny" Given that kind of culture what is your expectation? Courts find that people almost always deny their guilt in public statements - and so they give Zero weight to such denials. Zero point zero weight. What do you expect Postle to do? Subject himself to criminal prosecution and ruinous lawsuits by publicly stating: "Yes, I cheated!" History has shown that when you stick a microphone in front of someone that everyone - the innocent and the guilty - will DENY, DENY, DENY. There is literally no incentive to do otherwise.
So, why would any observer give weight to the fact that Postle states he didn't cheat?? Those claims mean nothing. He will say that with 100% certainty whether he is innocent or guilty. Gandler, can't you understand that?
I actually agree with most of your points. We all have a right to personal judgment (and I actually still never voted in the original poll, so whoever some time ago speculated that I was one of the ones who voted "Poker God", is not accurate, I know that was not you, just throwing it in my reply). I am not familiar well enough with all of those cases, but generally, yes that is a fair point.
However, some things do matter. If somebody admits to a crime, they are usually guilty, so his maintaining his own innocence while encouraging investigators to prove his innocence does have some bearing (and yes I am aware this is exactly what OJ did, the irony is not lost on me, though the alleged crimes are not even remotely close).
You are certainly right that many sports sadly do have a cover and deny culture. And, you are not going to hear a defense from me.
However, and I am by no means an expert, this does not seem to be the case with poker. If you cheat and get caught nobody will defend you (and nor should they). I do not think there is a culture in poker to cover for cheaters (if anything the opposite, again my non-expert opinion based on observations).
However, personal admissions were not my primary point (though I don't think its irrelevant, as certain types of serial criminals happily admit their crimes). There are endless questions that do not make sense to me. Why would a casino plan it in this way (if you are of the camp that this was planned by the casino)? If he was playing on his own and somehow hacked into the stream data, why would he cheat routinely instead of just very occasionally where it could be caulked up to dumb luck? If his main goal in life was to cheat at Poker why not find an easier and less visible (publicly) way such as collusion or a crooked Native casino, etc... ? It seems like he picked about the dumbest way to cheat and the dumbest way to do it. And, if it was organized by the casino upper-management that point is compounded.....
I am not a poker expert, in fact I will have freely said that I am trash at poker (certainly compared to the members here), and that is fine, to me its a game that I expect to generally lose at, but have fun. Back when this was still new I watched a lot of videos on it (many by Dough Polk whom I enjoy on a variety of topics), and to me I never saw anything that was over the top. Some odd plays perhaps for a professional, but I am sure if you filmed dozens of hours of me playing poker you would find endless awkward calls and folds that turned out to be good by luck, but were "wrong" in the play sense and somebody could say, "Look Gandler did not re-raise the nutflush on a single paired board, he just called, he must be cheating" etc.... (I just say this because this was one example I remember from one of the "cheating exposes" videos, and I know I have done it before, though I think Postle was against a straight flush not a full house, either way does not matter same premise). I guess my point is, if every time you play poker is recorded (especially as a nonpro), I am sure there are countless hours of making "suspect" plays that by sheer luck turn out to be right, and if hundreds of hours are edited down into just a short video of a few hands it can very easily be made to look like those hands are the norm. I don't know if I said that in a way that makes sense. But, I guess my even more overall point was, he was knowingly playing in a format where he knew he was being recorded, if he was cheating it was pretty bold, and if it was orchestrated by higher powers (casino managers) even more so.
Quote: GandlerNo, not if the casino was orchestrating it. Casinos can very easily place RFIDs in any chips or cards without anyone knowing. If the top level of the casino was planning this (which lets be honest is kind of far fetched that they would risk so much for so little gain....), they could easily insert such decks into any game Postle was playing and relay the information to his phone (or his hat device, or just que him via secret shock devices , or whatever others are claiming....). In fact this would be very easy for a casino and very few people would know. I find it very hard to believe that upper level management would plan this all out and put him into a live streamed game....
If a casino wanted to collude with Postle to cheat players for some reason there are probably endless better ways to accomplish this that have far less exposure (probably even far more than I realize).... The only reason we know about Postle is because people took the time to watch the countless hours of play and determine he won more than he should and makes some odd plays, if none of this was recorded (publicly) nobody would ever know...
This is one of the main reasons that I am skeptical on the casino orchestration claims, it just seems too blatant. I am sure if a casino for some motive (which is another issue, why would a casino risk so much on such little gain comparatively and so much potential negative backlash) wanted to back a cheater I am sure there are endless "better" ways.
Fair enough, but the overall principle is the same.
Generally in any field the person making the assertion has the burden to prove their assertion.
But, my primary issue with that poster is he seems to wish bad things on people who don't agree with him or choose to remain skeptical (which does not mean that I think he is innocent, just that I am not convinced of his guilt, certainly not with the fervor expressed by many on here, with many posts about what they want to do to Postle getting quite out of line.... for something that even if 100% of the allegations turn out to be 100% true, is just some dude cheating at mid stakes poker.... This is not a serial killer or some horrendous action, its a dude who maybe cheated at a card game.... People need to chill, its not the crime of the century.....)
It would take a lot of people to be in on it to run an RFID game when none was supposed to be running. I have not heard anyone express that broad of a conspiracy. I have heard people say that one casinos employee was in on it. So I would call your argument a straw man.
I would also say that my understanding is that RFID cards are different than the regular cards. So the players would want to know why they are playing a non streaming game with RFID cards.
Quote: Gandler
Fair enough, but the overall principle is the same.
Generally in any field the person making the assertion has the burden to prove their assertion.
Coming back just to this point. I disagree with it. In science you make a hypothesis and you test it. And maybe you find enough evidence to accept it. Or maybe you find enough evidence to disprove it. But most of the time, you don’t find enough evidence to either accept or reject it. You are missing this third category in your analysis.
My default is not that Postle is not a cheater unless proven otherwise.
My default is “I have no idea if Postle is a cheater or not, so let’s look at the evidence.”
For me, I saw enough to conclude that Postle cheated.
For you, you did not see enough to conclude he cheated. Fine. But I would argue that you also did not see enough to conclude he didn’t cheat. So instead of going around thinking he’s not a cheater, I think you should keep an open mind that maybe he did.
Unless, you are on a jury. In which case, if you didn’t think there is enough evidence, you should vote “not guilty.”
But “not guilty” doesn’t mean you believe he’s “innocent.”
