*** PokerStars VIP Rep thread ***

[daven]

We discussed this internally, and there's currently no specific rule against this type of behaviour. Recent trends (the addition of Zoom) address this, but as always we're open to hear player suggestions.

Would be happy to hear any thoughts,

Dylan

cheers for getting back on this
here are two suggestions:
1) implement a specific rule against this type of behaviour. (Given that this discussion has been held internally at stars, there is obviously a stronger argument for allowing this than for preventing it. I would be interested in hearing the arguments for allowing this behaviour, are you able to share these?)

2) kinda like what jyms suggested; if a player leaves a table, then for the next five minutes (?) the only seat at that specific table they can return to is the seat that they left. If it's occupied, well, guess they can't rejoin for five minutes - serves them right. If the table fills, well, guess they shouldn't have left, now they can enjoy the waitlist

[PokerStars VIP]

cheers for getting back on this
here are two suggestions:
1) implement a specific rule against this type of behaviour. (Given that this discussion has been held internally at stars, there is obviously a stronger argument for allowing this than for preventing it. I would be interested in hearing the arguments for allowing this behaviour, are you able to share these?)

2) kinda like what jyms suggested; if a player leaves a table, then for the next five minutes (?) the only seat at that specific table they can return to is the seat that they left. If it's occupied, well, guess they can't rejoin for five minutes - serves them right. If the table fills, well, guess they shouldn't have left, now they can enjoy the waitlist

Thanks for the suggestions guys; I'll be personally be handing these over to our Ring Games Managers for consideration and perhaps it will stir up more debate.

Dylan

[daven]

1) implement a specific rule against this type of behaviour. (Given that this discussion has been held internally at stars, there is obviously a stronger argument for allowing this than for preventing it. I would be interested in hearing the arguments for allowing this behaviour, are you able to share these?)

^

then again, changing status quo is a bigger deal than maintaining status quo, so i guess the arguments for change would have to be overwhelming - plus there would be a non-zero cost of implementing any changes into the poker stars client, plus communications around the issue, etc. Probably answered my own question

cheers for passing on the suggestions