Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=126890
Outed.Anonymous User wrote:I've had some success playing online poker. Should I note this on a resume/discuss in an interview?
I know people who have talked about poker for finance/hedge fund interviews and gotten jobs partially because of it.
ToTransferOrNot wrote:Um, isn't online poker not strictly... legal?
That is absolutely not true. A brief search reveals that all forms of gambling are illegal for all people in certain states - online wagering included - that it is currently unclear whether the Wire Act includes online poker for people using it to make a wage, and that the House passed a bill in July that would purport to legalize and regulate online gaming (which implies that the house considers it illegal, at the moment).lebroniousjames wrote:ToTransferOrNot wrote:Um, isn't online poker not strictly... legal?
if it's taxed like income, it's legal. online poker is taxed like income; therefore, it's legal
Kill yourself. You're on a fucking law school message board - you're not texting your 4th grade bff. Learn how to type. Jesusfuckingchrist.dood wrote:r we talking bout world series here? or just couple thousand here and there? first, it better be impressive, b/c i won a $25K poker tourney in vegas 2 years ago, blew it all that very night, and im certainly not gonna mention that. i also fucked up phil helmouth for a couple Gs back in madison wi in like 2004 right when poker was getting big. so assuming u won a substantial amount in some prestigious tourneys against known players, then the answer is:
depends on ur interviewer. a nice lady from HR? HELL NO, DO NOT MENTION THIS NO MATTER WUT. but another BRO who wants to live vicariously through a younger version of himself? yeah of course.
and if u'r as good as u say u are, then u R already an excellent judge of when and where it will be appropriate to "raise the stakes" in the interview.
I can has cheezburger?ToTransferOrNot wrote:Kill yourself. You're on a fucking law school message board - you're not texting your 4th grade bff. Learn how to type. Jesusfuckingchrist.dood wrote:r we talking bout world series here? or just couple thousand here and there? first, it better be impressive, b/c i won a $25K poker tourney in vegas 2 years ago, blew it all that very night, and im certainly not gonna mention that. i also fucked up phil helmouth for a couple Gs back in madison wi in like 2004 right when poker was getting big. so assuming u won a substantial amount in some prestigious tourneys against known players, then the answer is:
depends on ur interviewer. a nice lady from HR? HELL NO, DO NOT MENTION THIS NO MATTER WUT. but another BRO who wants to live vicariously through a younger version of himself? yeah of course.
and if u'r as good as u say u are, then u R already an excellent judge of when and where it will be appropriate to "raise the stakes" in the interview.
Drug trafficking is also taxed as income, and last I checked, that's generally frowned upon.lebroniousjames wrote:ToTransferOrNot wrote:Um, isn't online poker not strictly... legal?
if it's taxed like income, it's legal. online poker is taxed like income; therefore, it's legal
lolcat speak is an accepted exception. Going through entire posts replacing "you" with "u", "are" with "r", failing at using the shift key, etc, is not. Seriously.ResolutePear wrote:I can has cheezburger?ToTransferOrNot wrote:Kill yourself. You're on a fucking law school message board - you're not texting your 4th grade bff. Learn how to type. Jesusfuckingchrist.dood wrote:r we talking bout world series here? or just couple thousand here and there? first, it better be impressive, b/c i won a $25K poker tourney in vegas 2 years ago, blew it all that very night, and im certainly not gonna mention that. i also fucked up phil helmouth for a couple Gs back in madison wi in like 2004 right when poker was getting big. so assuming u won a substantial amount in some prestigious tourneys against known players, then the answer is:
depends on ur interviewer. a nice lady from HR? HELL NO, DO NOT MENTION THIS NO MATTER WUT. but another BRO who wants to live vicariously through a younger version of himself? yeah of course.
and if u'r as good as u say u are, then u R already an excellent judge of when and where it will be appropriate to "raise the stakes" in the interview.
ya got me, I didn't consider individual states.ToTransferOrNot wrote:That is absolutely not true. A brief search reveals that all forms of gambling are illegal for all people in certain states - online wagering included - that it is currently unclear whether the Wire Act includes online poker for people using it to make a wage, and that the House passed a bill in July that would purport to legalize and regulate online gaming (which implies that the house considers it illegal, at the moment).lebroniousjames wrote:ToTransferOrNot wrote:Um, isn't online poker not strictly... legal?
if it's taxed like income, it's legal. online poker is taxed like income; therefore, it's legal
Edit to add: The IRS couldn't give a shit where the income comes from, they tax it. Criminal law enforcement isn't their gig, and given the lack of information sharing between even agencies under the Homeland umbrella, the thought that the IRS would forward every activity it thinks may constitute wire fraud to the DOJ is laughable.
Poker itself is not illegal. Online poker is.dood wrote:also note its 100% legal in CA cause its a game of skill not gambling
I thought the definition for whether an activity was gambling was whether or not "luck predominated the outcome" or something like that. Since poker is a game mostly determined by skill, it should be exempt.ToTransferOrNot wrote:That is absolutely not true. A brief search reveals that all forms of gambling are illegal for all people in certain states - online wagering included - that it is currently unclear whether the Wire Act includes online poker for people using it to make a wage, and that the House passed a bill in July that would purport to legalize and regulate online gaming (which implies that the house considers it illegal, at the moment).
Edit to add: The IRS couldn't give a shit where the income comes from, they tax it. Criminal law enforcement isn't their gig, and given the lack of information sharing between even agencies under the Homeland umbrella, the thought that the IRS would forward every activity it thinks may constitute wire fraud to the DOJ is laughable.
You have trumped me, good sir.ToTransferOrNot wrote:lolcat speak is an accepted exception. Going through entire posts replacing "you" with "u", "are" with "r", failing at using the shift key, etc, is not. Seriously.ResolutePear wrote:I can has cheezburger?ToTransferOrNot wrote:Kill yourself. You're on a fucking law school message board - you're not texting your 4th grade bff. Learn how to type. Jesusfuckingchrist.dood wrote:r we talking bout world series here? or just couple thousand here and there? first, it better be impressive, b/c i won a $25K poker tourney in vegas 2 years ago, blew it all that very night, and im certainly not gonna mention that. i also fucked up phil helmouth for a couple Gs back in madison wi in like 2004 right when poker was getting big. so assuming u won a substantial amount in some prestigious tourneys against known players, then the answer is:
depends on ur interviewer. a nice lady from HR? HELL NO, DO NOT MENTION THIS NO MATTER WUT. but another BRO who wants to live vicariously through a younger version of himself? yeah of course.
and if u'r as good as u say u are, then u R already an excellent judge of when and where it will be appropriate to "raise the stakes" in the interview.
Also, its "haz." Outted as not being fully in line with your feline overlords.
I'd assume since it's across state borders it's federal. I'd research any federal statues on it to make sure.dood wrote:wut if u'r a resident of CA doing online poker? i not sure about that one.wiseowl wrote:Poker itself is not illegal. Online poker is.dood wrote:also note its 100% legal in CA cause its a game of skill not gambling
Varies by state. Also, whether poker is a game of skill or luck also (probably) varies by state, though I could be wrong on that point, since I haven't researched it. Further, there's no question that DOJ thinks the Wire Act should cover online poker for people making a living on it - though a circuit court (5th circuit, I think?) has said that it doesn't. There's also no question that the House passed a bill that would legalize and regulate it, which implies that the House thinks it is currently illegal.d34dluk3 wrote:I thought the definition for whether an activity was gambling was whether or not "luck predominated the outcome" or something like that. Since poker is a game mostly determined by skill, it should be exempt.ToTransferOrNot wrote:That is absolutely not true. A brief search reveals that all forms of gambling are illegal for all people in certain states - online wagering included - that it is currently unclear whether the Wire Act includes online poker for people using it to make a wage, and that the House passed a bill in July that would purport to legalize and regulate online gaming (which implies that the house considers it illegal, at the moment).
Edit to add: The IRS couldn't give a shit where the income comes from, they tax it. Criminal law enforcement isn't their gig, and given the lack of information sharing between even agencies under the Homeland umbrella, the thought that the IRS would forward every activity it thinks may constitute wire fraud to the DOJ is laughable.
Are you a moron?dood wrote:also, i dont think illegal vs. legal has any outcome in the answer to OPs question