Alan Mendelson alansbestbuys (Split Thread)

Rob Singer has also been banned from my forum: http://forum.alanbestbuys.com/showthread.php?2020-Rob-Singer-has-been-banned.

I'm surprised you put up with him for that long.

One of your posters said it well I think.

Quote: arcimede$ from Alan's forum

Rob is a pathological liar. Nothing he says can be believed. That is the bottom line.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Rob Singer has also been banned from my forum: http://forum.alanbestbuys.com/showthread.php?2020-Rob-Singer-has-been-banned.

He had 2500 posts, you'll miss him. He was a big
contributor.

Quote: EvenBob

He had 2500 posts, you'll miss him.

Quantity does not equal quality.

deleted

Alan, was the straw that broke the camel's back his claim to you in a private text that you have a "gambling problem," and his threat to print it in the paper?

BTW, as a public figure, you'd be hard-pressed to prove defamation.

Is our restaurant owner from Milwaukee behaving himself over there at BestBuys?

Quote: AlanMendelson

Rob Singer has also been banned from my forum: http://forum.alanbestbuys.com/showthread.php?2020-Rob-Singer-has-been-banned.

Singer has been barred off of every moderated forum he has ever participated in. That includes vpFREE and the Las Vegas Advisor forums. He is the most prolific internet troll I have ever encountered. He has been described by people with experience in mental health as a malignant narcissist.

" He is the most prolific internet troll I have ever encountered. "

You say that like it's a bad thing ?

Quote: MrV

Alan, was the straw that broke the camel's back his claim to you in a private text that you have a "gambling problem," and his threat to print it in the paper?

BTW, as a public figure, you'd be hard-pressed to prove defamation.

It wasn't the private text... it was the public statements.

As a public figure I need to prove malice. His constant attacks would be my evidence of malice. He has no evidence of a gambling problem. He drew his own conclusion. There are no records that I have ever had a gambling problem. It's not like TMZ reporting on a celebrity who is in rehab. I have never been in rehab. He would be hard pressed to find anyone who says I have ever had a gambling problem.

His statements were intentionally made to harm me. He claims he is writing an article for Gaming Today and has made it clear that he intends to cause me harm in the article. Let's see what they publish.

deleted

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Lawsuit if he does?

Of course I am going to sue him and any publication that carries an article alleging I have a gambling problem.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Of course I am going to sue him and any publication that carries an article alleging I have a gambling problem.

Let's hope your attorney is familiar with New York Times v. Sullivan.

Where is the 'actual malice' -- that is, making an allegation with a knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not?

Can you prove that he knows you do not have a gambling problem?

For that matter, can you prove that you don't have a gambling problem?

Heck, you got married at a craps table in Caesars, which could be Exhibit "A."

Is there a difference between a gambling fixation and a gambling problem?

What actual damages would you be able to prove?

Stay out of court on this one, Alan.

Rattle your sabers, but avoid the Agony and the Ecstasy of Litigation.

The lawyers will be the only winners on that one.

Heck, you got married at a craps table in Caesars, which could be Exhibit "A."

And Exhibits B thru Z in the minds of some jurors.

Does getting married at a craps table indicate a gambling problem? I've been married three times. So I agree I have a marriage problem... at least two of them.

As attorneys often say to reporters: I will not try this case in the press -- I will try it in court. I am waiting and so is my attorney. In fact, I might be waiting a long time: Mr Singer is yet to announce when his article will be printed in Gaming Today. He only said sometime in the future. Which is similar to his responses when asked for his supporting evidence about rigged slot machines that is supposedly in a storage locker.

Quote: AlanMendelson

I will not try this case in the press -- I will try it in court. I am waiting and so is my attorney.

How quickly they forget.

Remember Goldhaber v. Kohlenberg?

Quote: MrV

How quickly they forget.

Remember Goldhaber v. Kohlenberg?

Mr V I don't understand the point you are trying to make?

The reference is to a defamation lawsuit filed by one member of a message board against another; I thought you were familiar with the parties involved, but perhaps you are not.

The suit involved a blizzard of flames and insults, seemingly much worse than what you reference as to Singer.

In the message board defamation lawsuit a judgment was entered, a motion to vacate was denied at the trial level but then granted on appeal and the case was remanded to the trial court; it took years, cost a lot of money, and at the end of the day the case was either dropped or resolved by settlement: it never went to trial.

I never heard the parties claim on the board that it was settled, or explain why and how the case concluded, but I have to suspect they got tired of paying out fistfuls of money to their lawyers to argue and fight on their behalf.

No sense of public satisfaction or vindication could be claimed by the "victims" as they never had their day in court.

Your case could be different of course, but my point is that defamation cases are very tricky, not cheap, and tough by their nature to result in a financial result that meets or exceeds the cost of the litigation.

Assuming that you win, you wind up with a judgment: many judgments cannot be collected.

Wouldn't that suck, to "win" but not be able to collect?

How solvent, how collectible do you KNOW the target defendant to be?

Is he potentially judgment-proof?

*Note: do your homework on this before filing suit.*

So I guess it boils down to "the principle of the thing:" do you potentially want to roll dem bones on a matter of "principle" knowing full well that it could cost you over $50K-$100K, money you may never recover even if you win?

Alan, the claimed libel seems quite weak, in the scheme of things: it is possible that you could lose the suit, and be ordered to pay the fees and costs of the other party, at least if the judge so orders.

Do a candid quick cost / benefit analysis, is all I am saying.

Mr V I am afraid you missed what that case was about. The party who was sued did not believe he had to respond to the suit because it was filed in another state. The merits of the case were not discussed in the appeals process, but the ruling said that the case was still valid.

Quote: MrV

Do a candid quick cost / benefit analysis, is all I am saying.

Here is my candid, quick cost/benefit analysis: Gaming Today will never print what Rob Singer says he intends to write. But if they do print it, we're ready.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Mr V I am afraid you missed what that case was about. The party who was sued did not believe he had to respond to the suit because it was filed in another state. The merits of the case were not discussed in the appeals process, but the ruling said that the case was still valid.

I understand perfectly what happened, Alan.

Litigation, like love, will chart its own course.

I assume your attorney has assured you that the claim that you allegedly have a "gambling problem" is in fact actionable in tort?

You might want him / her to research and see how comparable insults / claims have fared.

Without more, I would not recommend suing.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Here is my candid, quick cost/benefit analysis: Gaming Today will never print what Rob Singer says he intends to write. But if they do print it, we're ready.

Alan, just out of curiosity, how often do minor celebrities like yourself have to deal with garbage like this? We all know that major celebrities like Steven Spielberg & David Letterman are big targets and have to be on the lookout, but I've always been curious about the smaller celebrities out there.

I've been under the impression that unfortunate incidents like this are rare, but since you're well-known in one of the biggest media markets in the country, I figure you'd have much better insight than myself. (And, of course, if you'd rather not answer, that's cool. I was just kinda curious about the 'price' of celebrity status.)

Thanks in advance.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Quantity does not equal quality.

+1

And that seems to be the common denominator of most "top posters"

His statement was that I am a gambling addict and addicted. These are damaging words. Would I ask for compensation? No. My action would be to have a retraction and correction made in any media publishing his allegation.

Rob has posted on my website that Gaming Today has cleared him to write two articles and Rob says he intends to criticize various people in those articles including the Wizard as well as other well known authors and even some anonymous forum posters. You can read Rob's posts here:

http://forum.alanbestbuys.com/showthread.php?1613-Documenting-History&highlight=gaming+today

In subsequent posts, and in different threads, Rob has made allegations that I am an addict and addicted.

As I posted before: this is not the same as a TV gossip magazine reporting that a celebrity was in rehab. That is not libel. That is reporting fact and is fair game. But he has made an allegation that I am an "addict" and I am "addicted" and there is no proof or evidence of that except for his personal accusation. I have never been advised of excessive gambling, I have never sought treatment or been treated, I have never been reported for any kind of addictive behavior. I certainly have no problems with casinos for outstanding debts or unpaid markers.

What we have is Rob Singer making an allegation just as he has made comments in poor taste about deceased players eating dirt, and players causing their spouses to become ill by being in casinos, or alleging that certain gaming authors are also addicts and/or shills for casinos and/or divorced their wives because of their need to gamble.

Rob Singer has made these allegations on Internet forums where he frankly has gotten away with it. But he says he has been offered the opportunity to write about this in Gaming Today and if Gaming Today permits him to make these same charges I will not let them stand.

The only other time I had to have an attorney bring or threaten a libel action was when I had a contact dispute with KCAL about 12 years ago. I was off the air for a period of one week because of a contact dispute involving a website that I owned at the time. The author of a TV gossip website wrote that I was suspended for having an affair with an intern. This was absolutely false. KCAL refused to comment because it is their policy not to comment. I told the author it was a contract dispute and he still refused to retract the story. What was even more damning for this author was that his wife worked at KCAL and managers were dropping "hints" that I was off the air only because of a contract dispute. Still, the author would not retract his story. So, my attorney wrote him a letter saying we would sue him. Only then did he issue a retraction. And a week later the contract dispute was resolved and I was back on the air. By the way, I was not suspended -- I still collected my full pay and benefits -- but I was off the air only because I was meeting with the CBS attorneys, my own attorney and AFTRA union officials to resolve the issue.

Quote: AlanMendelson

His statement was that I am a gambling addict and addicted. These are damaging words.

Why?

I don't mean "because it makes you mad" but what are your actual damages? Have you lost business, income, stature? Are you sure this would be worth your time?

Quote: George Bernard Shaw

I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.

Quote: MathExtremist

Why?

I don't mean "because it makes you mad" but what are your actual damages? Have you lost business, income, stature? Are you sure this would be worth your time?

My business is worth several million dollars a year. My reputation is priceless.

Sounds more like he's trying to shake you down to me.


I was wronged by a whacko in a similar manner but much more offensive. [in my opinion]

As I am not a public figure my attorney advised me that I would have to prove economic harm. And somehow be able to justify a number if I wanted to recover damages.

His counsel to me was that my opponent's right to free speech equaled my right to not be defamed? It would also take two years to get to court.

Being fairly new here I don't know who Rob is but I would think the magazine that he's claiming would print his dialogue about you would at least give you the opportunity for a comment. I find it hard to believe they would be willing to endanger they're reputation on some opinion of a "whack job" who has been kicked off so many chat boards and who appears to have some mental issues.

And lastly, are these publications going to let some internet personality make assertions about medical conditions? I don't think so. It does not appear to me that this person understands addiction. He may have briefly attended some 12 step program but got hung up at the 1st step and didn't make it to the 4th?

In your case, keep having fun and find some kind of weirdo armor?

petroglyph... I also doubt it will ever make it into Gaming Today. I'm just prepared in case it does.

Quote: AlanMendelson

My business is worth several million dollars a year. My reputation is priceless.

That wasn't the question. The question is whether that reputation or business are damaged in any way by someone on the Internet flaming you.

Or maybe it isn't -- I'm not an attorney so I'm just assuming that you need to prove damages. If someone were to publish an article that said "Alan Mendelson gave my brother leprosy and then killed him with an axe" -- two obviously false statements that each rise to the level of defamation per se -- wouldn't you need to demonstrate that your business or reputation suffered as a result in order to recover anything? Anyone here familiar with defamation law in the US?

Quote: MathExtremist

That wasn't the question. The question is whether that reputation or business are damaged in any way by someone on the Internet flaming you.

Or maybe it isn't -- I'm not an attorney so I'm just assuming that you need to prove damages. If someone were to publish an article that said "Alan Mendelson gave my brother leprosy and then killed him with an axe" -- two obviously false statements that each rise to the level of defamation per se -- wouldn't you need to demonstrate that your business or reputation suffered as a result in order to recover anything? Anyone here familiar with defamation law in the US?

I'd agree with Mr. V (who is a lawyer). Defamation law in the U.S. is not very plaintiff-friendly and is hairy to say the least. Mr. V referenced New York Times v. Sullivan which set a very high standard for plaintiffs, especially if the plaintiff is a "public figure." (Alan would probably be considered a public figure since he is on T.V.). The question of damages is how much your reputation, business, etc. suffered as a result of the libel. There also may be punitive damages if you can show it was wanton and malicious. Again, both of these damages are very hard to prove to the finder-of-fact (judge or jury).

You'd have to research the defamation law in every state where you plan to file suit as defamation is state law. For example, do you sue Singer in Nevada (his residence now I think), or Gaming Today in whatever state their office is in? Or do you sue them in Federal Court since the magazine is distributed everywhere?

Again, too much trouble and you could end up being awarded nominal damages of $1 and be on the hook for tens of thousands in legal fees. I would just challenge Singer to a duel :)

Again, too many of you are asking about damages. I don't want damages. I would want a correction and a retraction if indeed Rob Singer is able to somehow publish such claims in Gaming Today, Frankly, I doubt GT would ever publish such a thing. I also wonder if Rob Singer will actually be published in GT.

But it is Rob Singer's repeated personal attacks on me, and others including the publisher of this website, that led to him being banned on my site.

Quote: MathExtremist

That wasn't the question. The question is whether that reputation or business are damaged in any way by someone on the Internet flaming you.

There is a different standard for the Internet and for edited publications such as a newspaper.

The publisher of a website actually has little control and only must make a good faith effort to control and stop libelous posts.
A newspaper, where there is an editorial decision process, with review and judgment calls prior to publication, has a higher standard to prevent libelous comments from being published.

Quote: AlanMendelson

But he has made an allegation that I am an "addict" and I am "addicted" and there is no proof or evidence of that except for his personal accusation.

So then, if I claim that a cigarette smoker is an "addict," then by your thinking I am defaming the smoker?

I dont understand your point Mr V. Are you defending Rob Singer?

And in case you want a serious response, someone who smokes is not necessarily addicted to cigarettes.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Quantity does not equal quality.

Was he in reform school on your forum? I can't imagine his reputation hadn't proceeded him. If the Wizard ever invites him back here, I would hope the Wiz would not be too surprised when things start going rather badly.

Although some people here refer to it as livening up the forum. That's about the most positive spin you can put on it.

(actually, I believe his reincarnation in other forms has visited with us more than a couple times)

Quote: rxwine

Was he in reform school on your forum?

Rob was always abrasive, but things really got ugly when he started to make claims that the IRS allowed him to deduct his groceries as a tax deductible expense for gambling because he had people over at his house to discuss video poker, or had barbecues and video poker was discussed, and he served lunch when people came over to learn about video poker.

Then Rob offered up his tax returns to prove the grocery deductions but they were never sent because another forum member didn't send his tax returns for inspection first. But the fact was the other forum member didn't deduct his groceries as a gambling business expense, so why would anyone need to see the other player's tax returns.

That's when I became critical of Rob and Rob started to accuse me of being a gambling addict.

Before all that I wasn't an addict -- because I put videos about Rob's system on the Internet and on my website, and I gave him a fair shot to explain his system, and Rob even applauded me for winning on negative expectation games contrary to what the APs say should happen.

But it's when I said that he was off base about his tax return challenge that I suddenly became an addict.

And it got worse when I told him that he left thousands of dollars of comps "on the table" because he failed to play with a player's card and missed out on free play, offers and events such as the Great Gift Wrap Up. He challenged that. But when I reminded him that a year earlier he told me he was sorry that he didn't realize what he missed -- he really came down on me like a ton of bricks.

He also went ballistic over Bob Dancer's divorce saying that when Bob got married he predicted Bob's marriage would never last. But I pointed out that Bob's marriage lasted about 13 years and that launched another salvo that I was an addicted gambler.

And about that time he added me to his list of targets for his Gaming Today articles which included Dancer, the Wizard and others.

My business is worth several million dollars a year. My reputation is priceless.

What kind of business is that please??? I am curious.


Sighhhh!!!!! Sometime you come across a moron in your life. If you think it is worthwhile to pursue, then go ahead.

Let's fast forward the clock to 2033. 20 years from now. When we get old and look back . We will find this thing silly.
My opinion is "Don't waste time on this Rob Singer. Spend your time on something else."

So, there's this troll making threats to publish an opinion piece in a magazine stating that a minor celebrity has a gambling problem.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Rob was always abrasive, but things really got ugly when he started to make claims that the IRS allowed him to deduct his groceries as a tax deductible expense for gambling because he had people over at his house to discuss video poker, or had barbecues and video poker was discussed, and he served lunch when people came over to learn about video poker.

Then Rob offered up his tax returns to prove the grocery deductions but they were never sent because another forum member didn't send his tax returns for inspection first. But the fact was the other forum member didn't deduct his groceries as a gambling business expense, so why would anyone need to see the other player's tax returns.

That's when I became critical of Rob and Rob started to accuse me of being a gambling addict.

Before all that I wasn't an addict -- because I put videos about Rob's system on the Internet and on my website, and I gave him a fair shot to explain his system, and Rob even applauded me for winning on negative expectation games contrary to what the APs say should happen.

But it's when I said that he was off base about his tax return challenge that I suddenly became an addict.

And it got worse when I told him that he left thousands of dollars of comps "on the table" because he failed to play with a player's card and missed out on free play, offers and events such as the Great Gift Wrap Up. He challenged that. But when I reminded him that a year earlier he told me he was sorry that he didn't realize what he missed -- he really came down on me like a ton of bricks.

He also went ballistic over Bob Dancer's divorce saying that when Bob got married he predicted Bob's marriage would never last. But I pointed out that Bob's marriage lasted about 13 years and that launched another salvo that I was an addicted gambler.

And about that time he added me to his list of targets for his Gaming Today articles which included Dancer, the Wizard and others.

Alan, I'm glad you're standing your ground with Singer. His hate mail to me got so bad I threatened to press charges. Montana has a Privacy In Communication law where it's illegal to continually harass someone through electronic means. I finally blocked his emails. He is a diabolical person. He put heat on me with the IRS. His son-in-law was the district manager of the Phoenix office of the IRS. Singer told me things about myself that only the IRS and me should know. While he was telling the gambling world that I was a sick losing gambler, he was telling the IRS that I wasn't paying enough taxes on my gambling win. This is how low he can stoop.

I personally think he should be frozen out of the gambling community as much as possible.

deleted

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

I see he's (Rob Singer) been un-banned so he can foam at the mouth again.

Some people are gluttons for punishment.

Is Rob Singer..... Bob Dancer or via versa?

Bob Dancer announced his divorce in his LVA column. One of the statements Bob made was Shirley wanted him to retire from gambling and move away from Las Vegas. Then Rob Singer denounced Bob as a compulsive gambler who divorced his wife so he could continue gambling. But what if Bob would have retired from gambling and moved away from Las Vegas? After doing heavy forum combat with Rob Singer for quite awhile on another forum I know him pretty good. If Bob would have retired, Rob would have denounced him as a losing compulsive gambler who quit gambling because he went broke.

Singer will use any pretext available to attack those who disagree with him. The man has more routes than Greyhound Bus Lines.

You shouldn't dignify things like this with a response as done with threads like this. Remember this site's advice anything you share publicly can be seen by everyone. Just being so bothered by accusations confuses people who don't understand the world we know.

Yes, I "unbanned" Rob because he came up with a report of a big win which in some ways undermines all of his previous claims and beliefs about special plays and his strategies. Frankly, I think it is his undoing.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Yes, I "unbanned" Rob because he came up with a report of a big win which in some ways undermines all of his previous claims and beliefs about special plays and his strategies. Frankly, I think it is his undoing.

A report? Can you elaborate? Link?

Link: http://forum.alanbestbuys.com/showthread.php?2373-Rob-Singer-sent-me-a-trip-report.

Unless you are a member of my forum, you can't see the photo. The photo shows $25 Triple Double Bonus with quad threes with a kicker (ace) for a $50,000 pay.

This ignited all sorts of controversies including Rob's own strategy, his so-called retirement plans, his losses, and his incredible run of big wins with limited play that he says he had in 2013.

In other words, it's 10 pounds of Rob Singer in a five pound bag. It's too much.

And if anyone can copy the picture and post here it's okay with me.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Link: http://forum.alanbestbuys.com/showthread.php?2373-Rob-Singer-sent-me-a-trip-report.

Unless you are a member of my forum, you can't see the photo. The photo shows $25 Triple Double Bonus with quad threes with a kicker (ace) for a $50,000 pay.

This ignited all sorts of controversies including Rob's own strategy, his so-called retirement plans, his losses, and his incredible run of big wins with limited play that he says he had in 2013.

In other words, it's 10 pounds of Rob Singer in a five pound bag. It's too much.

And if anyone can copy the picture and post here it's okay with me.

I Don't understand how a few pictures prove anything? He may very well be hitting such hands. We have no clue how much he loses on all the other days. We have no clue if this is even his money.

Quote: AxelWolf

I Don't understand how a few pictures prove anything? He may very well be hitting such hands. We have no clue how much he loses on all the other days. We have no clue if this is even his money.

Exactly.

Quote: AlanMendelson

The photo shows $25 Triple Double Bonus with quad threes with a kicker (ace) for a $50,000 pay.

And if anyone can copy the picture and post here it's okay with me.

Wow!
when money is no object to playing!
and he was down $10k at that point!
If he missed that 3s card, I wonder if he still would have kept playing. How much to lose before a big win?

Looks like his special play of going just for 4oak - because of his method of play - has the higher winning probability for 4oak
2/47 (46/1081) instead of 1/47
So he took the shot of getting that one card.
Good for him.
what a gamble!

I like higher winning probabilities

VP for Winners in Excel

I hit a hand like this at 25 cents a few months back
and I was already up in my session
never will make the 11pm news
Happy Happy
Sally