Thread Rating:

coachbelly
coachbelly 
Joined: Oct 21, 2013
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 1043
December 1st, 2020 at 1:42:22 PM permalink
Quote: unJon

Are you an attorney by training by chance?



PM me and we can discuss it
Joeman
Joeman
Joined: Feb 21, 2014
  • Threads: 35
  • Posts: 1981
Thanks for this post from:
OnceDearSOOPOOFTBRogerKintscolistPokerGrinderrdw4potusDeMango
December 1st, 2020 at 1:49:11 PM permalink
This has gotten tedious and boring. Can we please get back to the dubious claims, never-gonna-happen wagers, and food/chip/money/suite pr0n pix this thread was built on?
"Dealer has 'rock'... Pay 'paper!'"
coachbelly
coachbelly 
Joined: Oct 21, 2013
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 1043
December 1st, 2020 at 1:49:32 PM permalink
Quote: kewlj

Oh for God sakes.



Shared wifi is common in multi-unit dwellings...a casino-hotel for example.

It doesn't mean those who share IPNs are the same person.
OnceDear
Administrator
OnceDear 
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
  • Threads: 47
  • Posts: 5570
December 1st, 2020 at 1:58:22 PM permalink
Quote: coachbelly

Are you implying that current members are immune from scrutiny
if making false accusations about ex-members?

I'm saying what I'm saying. I don't do 'implying'

Quote:

That may be a rule, but Singer and Logan are both listed as "Restricted User",
the same status as the most recently suspended member.

This is what I meant by a problematic misrepresentation of fact.

They are listed as 'Restricted User' A catch-all description applied for a one day suspension or a permanent ban. We know it to be a permanent ban in the cases of those two members. That's where the story ends.

Debating a few nine year old suspensions with a view to getting a current member suspended is pretty lame trolling.
Beware. The earth is NOT flat. Hit and run is not a winning strategy: Pressing into trends IS not a winning strategy: Progressives are not a winning strategy: Don't Buy It! .Don't even take it for free.
OnceDear
Administrator
OnceDear 
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
  • Threads: 47
  • Posts: 5570
December 1st, 2020 at 1:59:16 PM permalink
Quote: coachbelly

Shared wifi is common in multi-unit dwellings...a casino-hotel for example.

It doesn't mean those who share IPNs are the same person.

No-one made that assertion.
Beware. The earth is NOT flat. Hit and run is not a winning strategy: Pressing into trends IS not a winning strategy: Progressives are not a winning strategy: Don't Buy It! .Don't even take it for free.
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 8108
December 1st, 2020 at 2:23:52 PM permalink
Quote: OnceDear

I'm saying what I'm saying.

Debating a few nine year old suspensions with a view to getting a current member suspended is pretty lame trolling.



Fact. OnceDear is a moderator
Fact. OnceDear has pointed out trolling by CoachBelly
Fact. OnceDear as a moderator is supposed to suspend those he identifies as trolling
Question. Why is CoachBelly not suspended?
OnceDear
Administrator
OnceDear 
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
  • Threads: 47
  • Posts: 5570
December 1st, 2020 at 2:28:40 PM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

Fact. OnceDear is a moderator
Fact. OnceDear has pointed out trolling by CoachBelly
Fact. OnceDear as a moderator is supposed to suspend those he identifies as trolling
Question. Why is CoachBelly not suspended?

Less is more. Moderation in Moderation
Beware. The earth is NOT flat. Hit and run is not a winning strategy: Pressing into trends IS not a winning strategy: Progressives are not a winning strategy: Don't Buy It! .Don't even take it for free.
coachbelly
coachbelly 
Joined: Oct 21, 2013
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 1043
December 1st, 2020 at 2:37:43 PM permalink
Quote: OnceDear

I'm saying what I'm saying. I don't do 'implying'



You weren't clear about what you were saying, you implied something.

Are you saying that current members are immune from scrutiny when making false accusations about ex-members?

Quote: OnceDear

They are listed as 'Restricted User' A catch-all description applied for a one day suspension or a permanent ban. We know it to be a permanent ban in the cases of those two members. That's where the story ends.



No I don't think that's where the story ends, because it didn't end that way with kewlj.

They may be currently banned from posting on this forum, but they are still members.

But why even argue about it, unless you are protecting members from bearing false witness?

Quote: OnceDear

No-one made that assertion.



I didn't accuse anyone of making the assertion.

I'm explaining that different forum names cannot be established as bing the same individual for an IPN.

Do you disagree?

Quote: OnceDear

Debating a few nine year old suspensions with a view to getting a current member suspended is pretty lame trolling.



Why are you accusing me of trolling you?

I wasn't addressing you in this thread...you engaged me, and kept it going,
you continued to reply to my posts that were directed at other members...not you.

Go back to page 215 and read through the thread if you need to refresh your memory.
OnceDear
Administrator
OnceDear 
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
  • Threads: 47
  • Posts: 5570
Thanks for this post from:
teliotDeMango
December 1st, 2020 at 2:44:12 PM permalink
Quote: coachbelly

You weren't clear about what you were saying, you implied something.

Are you saying that current members are immune from scrutiny when making false accusations about ex-members?



No I don't think that's where the story ends, because it didn't end that way with kewlj.

They may be currently banned from posting on this forum, but they are still members.

But why even argue about it, unless you are protecting members from bearing false witness?



I didn't accuse anyone of making the assertion.

I'm explaining that different forum names cannot be established as bing the same individual for an IPN.

Do you disagree?



Why are you accusing me of trolling you?

I wasn't addressing you in this thread...you engaged me, and kept it going,
then you continued to reply to my posts that were directed at other members...not you.

Go back to page 215 and read through the thread if you need to refresh your memory.



Thank you for double spacing the lines of your post so that I can take each line in turn and debate it. I choose not to.
Maybe we will continue our chat in 7 3 days. Goodnight.
Last edited by: OnceDear on Dec 1, 2020
Beware. The earth is NOT flat. Hit and run is not a winning strategy: Pressing into trends IS not a winning strategy: Progressives are not a winning strategy: Don't Buy It! .Don't even take it for free.
TDVegas
TDVegas
Joined: Oct 30, 2018
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 846
December 2nd, 2020 at 11:19:14 AM permalink
I fail to see how depositing $50,000 at the cage is some relevant “rule” for watching an AP player in action. What’s the point? It’s not a wager. The wizards reputation is enough to satisfy any requirement for a “serious” individual to watch. My guess is the $50k requirement is more a red herring distraction that most (any?) won’t agree to do.

Secondly, I fail to see the worth of even discussing or expounding on the nuances of AP play in what is essentially an anonymous forum. Ego? What else can it be?

If I’m any good, I don’t need anyone to discuss anything. In fact, that discussion on an open forum with strangers could prove detrimental. Now, If the discussion might prove fruitful...I can guarantee it will be taken offline, IF they were smart.

My thinking is any AP player worth his salt isn’t on chat or gambling forums to help his bottom line. In my view, there’s only one logical conclusion to “advertise” as such. Ego.

  • Jump to: