Originally posted by datsmahname
^ this is certainly your interpretation, and as a PokerStrategy representative it'd be really peachy keen for you to look at the situation a little more objectively.
The implications of what happened can hardly be summed up as completely devoid of sound logic and good intention.
I agree, the protest went poorly on both sides. People went crazy sitting out on a billion tables, and stars responded by restricting or ban hammering everyone including people like myself who chose to sit out on just their regular volume.
I actually went as far as to tell stars that I would be participating in the "sit out" days in advance. They gave me no indication that the repercussions for doing so would lead to a possible account ban or table restriction.
If the changes weren't announced 3 days prior to their implementation I'm sure the community would have had much more time to understand them and come to a consensus on the revisions they'd like to see.
Its very easy for you to stand back doing absolutely nothing but criticize people for trying to get what they believe is a sound process for implementing change and a fair deal from the poker room.
Yes it is my interpreatation as someone who works in a corporation that has been heavily affected by the recession and has had to cut costs/increase prices, has been put at risk of redundancy and knows corporate attitudes.
When Stars said they were willing to negotiate what would have been wrong with delaying the sit-out? Yes the timing utterly sucked on Star's behalf but the hysterical, confused reaction didn't help either.
Stars have in the past had good customer rep and if there was sufficient outcry that they're willing to negotiate on rake. even undoing their changes due to public outcry (not a sitout) and VPP structure they may also have been open to other changes. Instead despite this concession there wasn't even any talk of a delay, it went right ahead.
I'm not in any way sitting on a high horse and as far as being a Pokerstrategy representative I don't think my arguement is trolling or unjustified in any way. It's simply another side of the arguement coming from someone who understands both sides of the arguement so I am looking at this objectively, especially given that the rake structures what were being proposed on 2+2 would have destroyed LHE games for good on Stars I don't think I'm wrong at all in critisising the way in which it was handled.
Both sides have to share blame in this. Stars' announcement timing was terrible and offered little in the way of good news, leading to a scenario where they had no choice but to turn the water cannon on protesters and even though there was legitimate complaints to be had there was a degree of rigidity shown by the people who sat out which is not going to work when negotiating with someone like Stars.
What I'm hoping is that guys like Hood and long standing regs from each community can meet with Stars at the Isle of Man with a concrete plan in place and work something out and that's the way it should be handled, and I'm more than willing to help them with that, either through representation or any kind of support they need be it projections or just advice.
Now the focus has to be on getting realistic numbers to the guys meeting with Stars and then to do some work on that
or should they, do you get points in live games??
