Haley Hintze’s incompetent legal evaluation about Game Protect

FlushDraw’s Haley Hintze claims the following on their website:

The site features some of the foremost experts in online gambling today and many of our investigative reports and stories have been featured by other popular media outlets and gaming forums.

The team here has always had a no-BS approach to everything we do, and we aim to deliver the very best with the detailed content that has been published on the site

Haley Hintze’s experts claim contradicts incompetent legal evaluation

Now compare the Flush Draw website experts claim with Haley Hintze’s juridical incompetent nonsense about Game Protect:

Article: Defunct Full Flush Poker Domain Acquired by Unnamed Affiliates

The notice from the new owners of the FullFlushPoker.com website also contains a warning of sorts. The warning is to cheated Full Flush customers who might pursue a supposed legal action being brought against various former EPN and FF officials by a website entity, GameProtect, though there’s no hard evidence any such action has commenced.

The eastern European affiliate operator behind Game Protect has sought contributions from cheated Full Flush players for many months, including a long series of posts at the PokerFraudAlert forums.

However, despite claims from “Game Protect” that he has a lawyer working on the case “on contingency,” his efforts at success appear scant. The various legal theories he’s claimed and offered appear baffling, befuddling, even ludicrous to those with a modicum of business-law education or expertise.

Worse, the Game Protect affiliate operator has required victims to pony up hundreds of dollars each to join his effort — payable only in anonymous Bitcoins, no less. (Haley Hintze makes no specific accusations or recommendations regarding the “Game Protect” effort, except for caveat emptor.)

haley hintze

I have learned in school the words content and explanation! Example: The legal theory “…content…” is buffling, befuddling, even ludicrous because “…explanation…” and “…source…”.

Please “legal expert” Haley Hintze, tell us which legal theories are buffling, befuddling, even ludicrous and why and based on what?

If you are not able to deliver this, your statement will appear like:

Leave a Reply