After leaving ieLogic, I did not speak to Carolyn until this scandal broke. We worked together very closely for a while. I thought she might be upset with me for leaving her hanging.
Yes, I am willing to go on public record and state that I do not believe that Carolyn was involved in cheating. Carolyn was a VIP service representative. In this position, she was commonly asked to move around lots of money. I am also of the opinion that a lot of corporate accounts payable type activity was handled through transfers on the site. In such an environment, I believe that it would be very easy to not notice a subchannel of fishy behavior. Changing screen names was not against policy at UltimateBet, and was something you could ask customer service to do.
Members of the poker community have stated that ieSnare should have caught this scandal early. I’d like people to think about the words “association tarpit”. When running the early versions of ieSnare’s analysis tools, if it came across anyone associated with the project, then every pro, manager and employee was quickly dragged into the net. For example, If Russ came up in a search, my name would also come up within a hop or two of the (somewhat naive) analysis algorithm.
So, ieSnare was a tool that was specifically designed to root out EXTERNAL fraud. Its capabilities with internal fraud were very weak. The associated accounts and computers would simply mushroom to a point of unusability. In the early version of the toolset, we would simply stop analysis at the depth at which an explosion of association occurred. I would expect that the algorithm was improved after my departure.
Well, when Carolyn and I got back in touch, we were able to commiserate about how we’d both been hounded by the poker community, and the hate mail, rude crank calls and totally unfair forum posts we’d endured. If the poker community wanted information, they sure chose vinegar over honey.
Personally, I’ve been harassed, and at various times accused of the following: a) having been involved in cheating, b) having written the software that facilitated cheating, and c) having been involved in an extortion scam to keep my mouth shut. Well, none of that happened. Unfortunately, I have no way to prove any of this. One thing is for sure though – the 2+2 forums are not the proper venue to redress the grievances of the victims of this crime.
During my dialog with Carolyn, we decided to be choosy about who we would give our story to. There were basically four options: 1) call 60 minutes, 2) Mike Brunker of MSNBC, who had contacted me, but respected my right to peace, 3) Scott Bell (who has threatened to publish material about me that I believe he knew to be inaccurate in an effort to cajole me into cooperating with him), or 4) Haley Hintze (a known poker journalist with good references in the community).
The choice of the lady with references was pretty easy. Carolyn and I have given everything we know to Haley.
Now, the paranoid asshole set will inevitably use their Dollar Store Jump To Conclusions Mat to “determine” that we are colluding to cleanse the narrative. It’s taken me years, but I’ve come to grip with the fact that some people simply will not be satisfied. …so if that’s what you think, you’re wrong.
Over the course of a few years, I’ve had a long email conversation with Haley. At one point, I finally agreed to give a taped interview. This interview took over 2.5 hours, and was extremely thorough. This happened about a year ago, shortly after some asshole lawyer decided to use my name in his $25M lawsuit. The following fact should interest the reader: Suing for libel in regards to the contents of a court filing is exceptionally difficult.
There is a website that reported on the lawsuit being filed. They used the words “…clearly implicates…Jack Bates.” I am reserving my right until the statue of limitations expires to sue the author and distributor of this work. I hope that there is a resurgence of poker journalism so that there will be actual funds to go after.
I am willing to accept very public apologies for having used my name in an inaccurate manner.
OK, that was long. Hope you find it informative.
Everything that Bates wrote, and that I wrote in my one brief post to the thread, was true. Bates did an interview of approximately 2:40 with me, last year, in direct response to the ridiculous blackmail threats lodged against him and others by Bell.
Not only has Jack Bates been a source for me about certain technical aspects of the UB cheating, he’s actually been quite open about it, unlike other sources of mine whose privacy I still protect. (Bates even publicly “friended” me on Facebook and Twitter just to spite Bell, which was well worth the inside chuckle.)
And all this from a guy, meaning Jack Bates, who values his private life immensely and feels like he’s been besieged by these ongoing false accusations, which have continued for three years and which Bates alleges have now cost him employment opportunities. Bates wouldn’t even have talked with me in the first place had it not been for Bell’s initial, ridiculous threats, and I say that with the knowledge of having come to know and understand Jack in the last couple of years.
As for the stuff about my Bates interview being forwarded to the FBI, that’s totally true as well. I have had occasional discussions with FBI and DOJ agents in connection with the AP and UB scandals, and after completing the interviewing and reviewing the entirety of Bell’s threats, we jointly decided that forwarding the complete transcript of the interview, plus the original recordings, was desirable.
This was done both with the knowledge of Bell’s willfullly false blackmail allegations, and the fact that when forwarded, the info presented therein was still within what we generally perceived as a five-year statute of limitations regarding the UB cheating. Bates and I, we really tried to get that info into the legal system, but I wholly support Bates’ decision not to go groveling to a lawyer and a supposed documentary who damaged his public name in their own pursuit of profit and fame..
We’ll wrap this series up in the next post, with a few additional thoughts.