Help needed- got 2 accounts on PS and want to cash out- can i?

[zachvac]

Hey zachvac, I don't believe that picture of you. You have to be in your 60's.

lol, you can believe whatever the hell you want, I couldn't care less.

 

[quads]

Will somebody please lock this thread.

 

[pokerchris]

wrong. Playing poker is spending money, plain and simple. If a kid can pay $5 to watch a movie or buy $5 worth of candy why can't he buy-in at a $5 poker game? What about poker makes it unsuitable for kids under 18 yet if you want to pay for other forms of entertainment or goods it's perfectly fine?

And owning guns is legal in the US for kids under 18, you just must get training and a lisence along with parental permission and responsibility. Having sex is also legal below 18, usually as long as they are within 2 years of each other depending on the State.

WRONG. One of the reason to have an age restriction is that kids have less control of his or her mind. Spend $5 watching a movie is totally different from spend $5 gambling.

 

[zachvac]

Spend $5 watching a movie is totally different from spend $5 gambling.

Of course it is, and of course it's great debating skills to just state something and not support the claim nor say why it helps prove your point.

 

[pokerchris]

Wow, I don't think you understand basic logic.

My murder analogy was a FLAWED ANALOGY to point out how YOUR EARLIER ANALOGY equating all forms of breaking the law (ie saying that if breaking the law in one way was right, all forms were right thus the OP was fine). You made a flawed analogy and I made up an equally flawed analogy to show how your original analogy was flawed.

Again you just answered your own question.

 

[quads]

lol, you can believe whatever the hell you want, I couldn't care less.

Wish I could answer you with what is honestly on my mind, but I've been warned already, and don't want to get banned.

 

[4Aces]

Do I want to get into this... why not, "everyone else is doin' it"

Breaking the law: If you are playing and you are under your Country/State's age limit to gamble, you are breaking the law

Breaking the rules: If you are playing and you are under a certain site/B&M's age limit, you are breaking their rules. And in any "game" I've played in, if you break the rules you are "cheating". If you move two squares in checkers and your opponent does not notice, you've still cheated since you've broken the rules.

You can be breaking the law without breaking the rules and you can be breaking the rules without breaking the law. Depends on your age and the restricted age.


It seems pretty simple really.

As for stealing, this is really a gray area, it would take someone in law to clearify if this situation is actually "theft" per say though. But I would tend to agree with Zach. Personally, if someone has "cheated" me out of something, they have "stolen" it from me since they did not take it the correct way.

If a 17 YO played my state's lotto and wind, then cashed the check after they turned 18, technically they stole that money from someone else who could/should have won. Even if it was a $1 or $10M winner, it still should/could have been someone elses. As for the bubble, say said 17 YO purchased that ticket in front of me... that ticket (scratch off since lotto uses RNG) would've been mine to win, so yeah, he TOOK/stole that winner from me. I don't even know if a lotto company would cash said ticket. If this were a B&M and this happened, the B&M would take the chips back immediatly and probably report this player to authorities.

Not only did OP cheat... and yes, I will use the word cheat since he did it against the "rules"; not only did the OP "cheat" the bubble, he cheated ANY player he played against. If he made it to the money he, more than likely, went HU with several others that he knocked out. Not only that, and you're going to love this, he changed how ALL the cards were dealt at any table that he was on. Technically this "cheated" many MANY players since he was there when he shouldn't have been. Want another? If this was a max seat tourney which was maxed out, he cheated 1 "legit" player out of a seat. Plus, are you ready for this one, he changed the seating chart of everyone seated after him, which changes the cards all of those people were dealt. SO, it may be "cool" if someone beats you, but do you realize how much they may have really changed the outcome?

As for something which is considered "accepted" as some of you would "accept" the OP playing underage; Smoking marijuana in the US is VERY common and very easy to come across, but it's still illegal. Should it be legal is a whole other topic, but at this time it IS ILLEGAL. Weather it's "accepted" or not, it is illegal.

I don't agree that "breaking the rules" is always cheating. Even if it is, underage players are not cheating in a way that gives them any unfair advantage, which imo is the REAL definition of cheating, especially in poker. Even if playing underage does count as cheating, it is not nearly as bad as all the other forms of cheating in poker. In fact any type of cheating in poker is at least 999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 times worse than simply being underage.

I don't care what the "correct" definition of cheating is. I just cannot say that playing underage just is cheating. In fact, I would be amazed if anyone on this planet thought it was.

 

[zachvac]

Again you just answered your own question.

umm... Wow you're horrible at trying to prove your point. I didn't ask a question, and if I did it was so far back that your one-line comments that had no bearing on the topic made me forget about it.

 

[pokerchris]

Of course it is, and of course it's great debating skills to just state something and not support the claim nor say why it helps prove your point.

I think any adult can see the difference.

 

[K_Kahne_Fan]

Actually it's not quite as straightforward as you make it sound. Moving two squares in checkers is breaking the rules of the game, and is cheating. But this person did not break the rules of poker.

HA!! Love the change of name. I think it may be too long a username though

How about the analogy of the lottery ticket though?

If they were in front of me and bought a lottery ticket that I was going to purchase, they technically "took" that ticket from me. If they were dealt AA, and you were the next player (or any effected player) and you were dealt 27o, then that AA should have been yours, and maybe you would've been paid (you being any player not paid). So yeah, they STOLE that $$, as little as it may have been from players who were in the tourney legitimately.

 

[NoWuckingFurries]

Smoking pot/speeding are both "accepted" by many... except the authorities who make the laws which I am supposed to abide by.

Actually laws can only really succeed when they have the general support of the public. In the UK there have been speed cameras appearing all over the place, supposedly in the name of "reducing deaths on the road", but in reality just being another way of generating enormous revenues from motorists. However, once people started going out in the middle of the night and chopping them down, the authorities changed their mind, and a lot of speed cameras are still there but never actually flash any more. It only works if the majority of people believe that things like that are genuinely good for society.

WRONG. One of the reason to have an age restriction is that kids have less control of his or her mind. Spend $5 watching a movie is totally different from spend $5 gambling.

I don't see playing poker as being the same as putting money on whether a certain horse or football team is going to win. To me there is not much difference between playing poker and going tenpin bowling... and I've seen no evidence to suggest that poker is addictive.

Will somebody please lock this thread.

It doesn't need locking, if you don't like it then please just stop reading it and posting in it.

 

[zachvac]

Wish I could answer you with what is honestly on my mind, but I've been warned already, and don't want to get banned.

I honestly don't even know what you're upset about, you've hardly posted on this thread anyway. If you really feel like saying something, shoot me a PM. I won't report anything, I can handle insults or whatever you want to say to me aside from death threats.

I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but I've been trying to state my case and I'm consistently being told that I'm wrong and I am countering the arguments. Are you pissed because I am solidly refuting the arguments against me with sound logic? I'm not trying to piss anyone off, but I also don't like it when people try to tell me I'm wrong (not in a nice way either I may add) and then use terribly flawed logic to "prove" it.

 

[zachvac]

I think any adult can see the difference.

Are we speaking English here? It seems I've had no idea what you've been saying for at least the last 5 points, you pointing to questions I haven't asked and talking about differences that you don't elaborate on.

 

[4Aces]

[x] Zach is good at debating.

 

[NoWuckingFurries]

HA!! Love the change of name. I think it may be too long a username though

How about the analogy of the lottery ticket though?

If they were in front of me and bought a lottery ticket that I was going to purchase, they technically "took" that ticket from me. If they were dealt AA, and you were the next player (or any effected player) and you were dealt 27o, then that AA should have been yours, and maybe you would've been paid (you being any player not paid). So yeah, they STOLE that $$, as little as it may have been from players who were in the tourney legitimately.

I'm not really bothered about the other people involved. What I care about is:

1. Did I have fun playing the tourney.
2. Did I play every hand to the best of my ability.

If there are people colluding, or using multiple user names, things that I really consider to be cheating, then I definitely care about it. Anything like that I would certainly report if I believed it was happening. Somebody's age is of little relevance to me. Similarly I care about whether I win the lottery - but not about whether the people that won it were underage or not.

 

[quads]

Hey zachvzc, I think it has become obvious that us common folk are to dumb and unable to compete with your forceful wisdom.

 

[K_Kahne_Fan]

I just cannot say that playing underage just is cheating.

From Merriam Webster dictionary

verb
1: to deprive of something valuable (prize $$) by the use of deceit or fraud (deceived the site by playing underage and took winnings from legit players)
I would agree with Zach that the payment at the end of a freeroll = something of value

noun
1: the act or an instance of fraudulently deceiving
Clearly "deceived" the poker site by stating they were underage
4: the obtaining of property from another by an intentional active distortion of the truth
They distorted the truth to "obtain" prize winnings that a legitimate player should have won.

Looks like it fits as a verb and a nound.

 

[cardfetish]

Can candy become addictive? I know a ton of kids who had jobs during the summers and blew it all before school was out and they worked again. None of these people played poker. My logic is that if it's legal to blow your money on other stuff, why isn't it legal to blow your money on poker?

I think you missed my point on this....I was saying that a young adult who is not old enough to even work or own a credit card, may be enticed to enter into other illegal activities in order to play online.

Please read the complete thought in my earlier statement. A 14 or 15 year old should be supervised while using the internet anyway, read the papers about kids as old as 17-18 being harmed by their activities on the internet. Not that I'm saying playing online poker will result in them turning up on the back of a milk carton, but ....
I wouldn't compare candy to poker either, it is an entirely different beast.

A young adult has no business in this type of environment, I would personally never allow any child of mine under the age of 18 to enter a gambling hall of any sort. Live/Online Casino or otherwise....

Most young people do not have the maturity level to handle it and can fall into some bad experiences. Now, I do feel that if you are old enough to vote or go to war, then yes you should be allowed every privilage than all Citizens have.

 

[NoWuckingFurries]

Hey zachvzc, I think it has become obvious that us common folk are to dumb and unable to compete with your forceful wisdom.

Maybe you're inadequate in that area, I don't know, but the general purpose of a forum is to debate subjects of interest. Generally speaking it's not personal, although discussions can of course become heated at times.

A young adult has no business in this type of environment, I would personally never allow any child of mine under the age of 18 to enter a gambling hall of any sort. Live/Online Casino or otherwise....

Most young people do not have the maturity level to handle it and can fall into some bad experiences.

I would much rather that my teenage daughter experienced it under our watchful gaze than saw it as some "forbidden fruit" - but in the UK they wouldn't be allowed into the casino unless they were 18 or older anyway. If she showed an interest in online poker I would allow her to try it, but she's more into painting and sculpting dragons, and attending drama courses.

 

[K_Kahne_Fan]

...the general purpose of a forum is to debate subjects of interest. Generally speaking it's not personal...

I would agree and add that CC has some great members who are probably the best forum members I have ever seen when it comes to keeping debates civil. Heck, I've asked political questions here and had civil responses. Try that on just about any other forum and see what happens.

 

[zachvac]

I think you missed my point on this....I was saying that a young adult who is not old enough to even work or own a credit card, may be enticed to enter into other illegal activities in order to play online.

Please read the complete thought in my earlier statement. A 14 or 15 year old should be supervised while using the internet anyway, read the papers about kids as old as 17-18 being harmed by their activities on the internet. Not that I'm saying playing Online Poker will result in them turning up on the back of a milk carton, but ....
I wouldn't compare candy to poker either, it is an entirely different beast.

A young adult has no business in this type of environment, I would personally never allow any child of mine under the age of 18 to enter a gambling hall of any sort. Live/Online Casino or otherwise....

Most young people do not have the maturity level to handle it and can fall into some bad experiences. Now, I do feel that if you are old enough to vote or go to war, then yes you should be allowed every privilage than all Citizens have.

ok, valid point here. I totally understand this POV, although I still disagree somewhat.

When I was young (say like 9 or 10), I didn't work, but I had money from my allowance for doing chores each week around the house. I used it to buy baseball cards, video games, toys, anything else I needed and could afford on $3/week.

But just because some would go through illegal means to finance gambling (would a kid steal if there were a toy they really wanted and couldn't afford? Should we ban kids buying expensive toys?) doesn't mean we should punish everyone. If poker were physically addictive, I agree. Cigarettes I agree with the ban until the age of 18 and alcohol I agree with a ban until 18 (I know it's 21, I would make it 18 if I were supreme ruler of the universe).

But poker is not physically addicting, I think the addictiveness comes from the fact that it's fun, just like going to the movies is fun and just like eating a Snickers bar is fun (and that's actually physically addicting as well, although not extremely). I understand your POV and at this point I think we just need to agree to disagree, but I believe that since there is no physical addicting quality of poker and the fact that it is simply a form of entertainment, that real money poker should be completely legal for anyone who owns money. Obviously parents can always restrict this just as they can restrict whether the kid owns money or spends it on candy.

And I also agree with you about the internet. Unless a parent trusts the kid completely and thinks they understand some of the risks of the internet, there should be some kind of supervision. There is all kinds of software out there some of which is utilized by parents.

 

[4Aces]

OK, how can I explain my thoughts. I guess playing online is cheating by definition. But its not cheating in a way that most people see as cheating. By that I mean its not pure cheating. In fact its not even slightly close to pure cheating.
Basically I think playing online poker underage is not wrong, its not bad, but by "definition" it is cheating. < See how stupid that sounds though? You must agree with that. I really wouldn't give a $hit if an underage player won money from me, and I think anyone you would care and see it as "cheating" (in the way that we all know cheating as, not the stupid "exact definition") is sad.

 

[cardfetish]

I don't see playing poker as being the same as putting money on whether a certain horse or football team is going to win. To me there is not much difference between playing poker and going tenpin bowling... and I've seen no evidence to suggest that poker is addictive.It doesn't need locking, if you don't like it then please just stop reading it and posting in it.

Poker not addictive? EV=Gamblers Anonymous

Gamblers Anonymous
International Service Office
http://www.gamblersanonymous.org
Features: International phone numbers, hotlines, help for family and friends, and a series of questions and answers for identifying compulsive gambling.

The Canadian Foundation
on Compulsive Gambling (Ontario)
http://www.responsiblegambling.org
Features: Tips, help sections, and some of the latest research from canada and elsewhere.

New Zealand Gambling Problem Helpline
http://www.gamblingproblem.co.nz
Features: Hotlines, local help, newsletters and more...

Gamcare
http://www.gamcare.org.uk
Features: Problem counseling, publications, networks and educational materials.>

Why are these posted at every gamling site? Why do they even exist?

 

[zachvac]

Hey zachvzc, I think it has become obvious that us common folk are to dumb and unable to compete with your forceful wisdom.

umm wtf? I'm going to make my point and do it the best I can. Nothing's personal here but when I know something about a topic I'm not going to dumb it down and if I'm debating I'm going to do my best to try to prove my point. What exactly makes you think that I think I'm better than anyone else here? Because I think I'm right? Don't most people in a debate think that?

 

[NoWuckingFurries]

Cigarettes I agree with the ban until the age of 18 and alcohol I agree with a ban until 18 (I know it's 21, I would make it 18 if I were supreme ruler of the universe).

18 in England.

And I also agree with you about the internet. Unless a parent trusts the kid completely and thinks they understand some of the risks of the internet, there should be some kind of supervision. There is all kinds of software out there some of which is utilized by parents.

I use a program which limits the total amount of hours she can spend online each day, and if she's using her laptop in her bedroom the bedroom door has to stay open, but we don't really restrict what content she can access.