Apparently collecting rake didn't create an obligation to run a fair & secure tournament. Won't be returning to @BorgataPoker any time soon.
-
-
Replying to @thinkingpoker
@thinkingpoker@BorgataPoker how would you have handled it?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @elgatonegro99
@elgatonegro99 Refunds for affected players should have come out@BorgataPoker's pocket, not the pockets of the final 27.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @thinkingpoker
@thinkingpoker@elgatonegro99 Do you think@BorgataPoker was negligent, or that the house is generally responsible for making players whole?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NateMeyvis
@NateMeyvis@BorgataPoker Strong presumption of negligence whenever there is cheating. Collecting rake incurs obligation to ensure fair game3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @thinkingpoker
@thinkingpoker@BorgataPoker More fundamentally: the implicit contract is to take reasonable precautions, not to *ensure* fairness.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @NateMeyvis
@NateMeyvis@thinkingpoker @BorgataPokerI don't think the casino should be expected to pick up the tab. Would you expect the same in cash?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @elgatonegro99
@elgatonegro99@NateMeyvis Yes, if I pay a fee to protect me from cheating, and I get cheated, I expect more than a refund of the fee.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @thinkingpoker
@thinkingpoker@elgatonegro99 Nice chiasm, but I don't think that's a good principle. One often pays for limited, reasonable protection.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
Replying to @limonpoker
@limonpoker @thinkingpoker It does, I think? Also: I'm not saying the Borgata is right here, just that reimbursing for cheating is tricky.
1:51 PM - 17 Apr 2014
0 replies
0 retweets
1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.