It’s my opinion that Michael Josem should not be allowed to post pro-PokerStars comments with his personal account while refusing to answer users’ legitimate concerns and questions that have been put to his Pokerstars Michael J account, particularly in this thread: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28/internet-poker/rationale-behind-recent-pokerstars-changes-1485671/
Dropping a blatant marketing statement into the Zoo and abandoning it is, at best, antisocial. Doing so and then showing up under a different account to defend Pokerstars in other situations strikes me as sufficiently bad behavior for 2+2 to consider doing something about it.
Relevant posts yesterday and today as Josem:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29/news-views-gossip/how-pokerstars-were-spending-600k-marketing-their-early-days-1487865/index2.html#post45189537
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29/news-views-gossip/pokerstars-32k-confiscation-tl-dr-994012/index27.html#post45196047
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28/internet-poker/great-poker-rigged-debate-collected-threads-edition-255990/index4911.html#post45204810My proposed solution would be that Josem be prevented from posting until Pokerstars Michael J responds to the concerns of the community, or until he is no longer a representative of PokerStars.
I don’t have anything against Michael Josem – in fact I’ve thought fairly well of him in the past – but the recent behavior by the PokerStars reps stinks, and should have consequences. While the posts may be directed by Amaya management, reps choosing to act as mouthpieces should not be absolved.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showpost.php?p=43053220&postcount=117
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showpost.php?p=43134385&postcount=136
(All over the world varieties of sites make claims to have systems very properly or even ideally devoted to the interests of the professional or recreational players of those sites and always an externally located critic can argue that the site is actually a sort of despotism.) ~Ideal Poker
thewealthofchips 