New Rule
Quote: RSIMO, it should just be "no politics / religion / etc..." for the new rule. I don't think it should be "must be related to gaming / Vegas / etc..." Are threads like GWAE's terrible "Miscellanious discussion" gonna be gone? What about the thread about where we update what we had for dinner and DRich is like, "I had candy for breakfast, chips for lunch, and tortino's pizza roles for dinner"?
If the fun but off-topic threads are gone, then I think the forum would pretty much die instantly, and I don't want to see that happen. I think the political and whatnot threads should be gone, though. I don't need to read stuff about politics on here. Subscribe to r/The_Donald for better political discussions.
Also, in lieu of these new rules, I propose we plan a fun activity. We should bring Nathan back! :)
You deserve a 7 day ban for the insult of the bestest thread ever
Quote: DRichTomorrows breakfast will be a slurry of Propofol and other anesthetics for surgery.
If you mentioned that I missed it so congrats on getting the things you needed done so you can go ahead with the surgery. Hope everything goes great for you!
1. Will this be all an encompassing implementation if the final word is to implement it? As in purging ALL perceived so called non topic threads across the board?
I've seen plenty and ongoing heated debates on gambling, so what is considered a problem? Many members hijack wov threads daily, should the site take a more thorough and unbiased look at these members? Instead of censoring actual topics? I don't believe it;s the topics causing problems.
2. Wouldn't this also cause a drop of already lower readership?
3. What would the criteria for non gambling topic be?
... Is collecting poker chips about gambling?
... Is traveling to foreign locations and discussing food deals gambling.
... Is threads about wov reunions and how much chicken nuggets in a eating contest gambling?
... Is blogs about vegas shows gambling? Will all threads about vegas things to do be removed?
... Is Epsteins suicide about gambling?
Some topics garner interests as a aside of gambling but derive from a gambling topic. Some don't and are born on their own. It seems to me, to attempt to stop this free flow of discussions from gambling offshoots topics would be to shoot ones foot off to stop athletes foot from spreading.
Perhaps instead, in addition to having the 'off topic' section, which wov has already, remove that topic description from the landing page and have it as a link instead where people will only see the off topic titles after they further click that link. Only show the gambling titles on the landing page.
One thing to keep in mind, wov will not be able to stop the internet machine from finding any topic that was posted to wov. Wov could stop web crawling from happening with coding in the web site headings however.
All forums have a off topic section. Instead of pigeon holing everyone into a narrow subject matter and forbidding open discussions, just make it a little harder to find.
It wasn't lost on me that a suggestion was to take further discussions to another semi related web site.
It will be interesting how this plays out.
Best of results to you, I hope for your speedy recovery.Quote: DRichThank you, I really hope this site gets back to gambling material.
BTW, today was beef jerky for breakfast. Tonight's dinner will be at Juan's Flaming Fajita's. Tomorrows breakfast will be a slurry of Propofol and other anesthetics for surgery.
Quote: GWAEI have no idea how I feel about this. I just took a look at my last 20 threads to see where I fall as to what I have started discussion with and I think I am pretty inline with how the forum is wanting to be run.
I then took a look at my last posts and I mostly posted in gaming or betting threads with the exception of weight loss, food, and miscellaneous.
I then took a look at a handful of people who I will not name and they last 100 posts were 95% not gaming or gambling related.
The reason that I am on the fence is because I came here for a gambling reason but stuck around so long because other discussions have lead to some friendships. I talk to some people outside of here and are wondering if that would have happened without the other banter that happens. I really do enjoy the lighthearted conversations that surround a random thread in miscellaneous where people post random crap that only gets discussed for a few hours and the camaraderie between some people via the weight loss threads (even though I am still fat and seemingly getting fatter). I will check into this site multiple times a day and at night multiple times in an hour while watching TV. Without all of the other stuff I may only check 1 time a day or maybe less.
Saying all of that there are so many topics that I do not read and wish they were not on this site. Threads regarding politics, or gun control, or religion I feel do not belong on here. I have a few long term friends that I have no idea how they have ever voted and we just do not discuss such things. During this last month I have lost a lot of respect for a few people based on how they have been posting in some of these threads that I happen to read.
IMO I think there should be a little less of a drastic measure taken. Why can't there just be a rule to ban all controversial topics. I know some people couldn't care less about food topics which can easily be blocked. The politics ones can also be blocked but anything controversial seems to spill into other topics quite easily. I have never seen a food topic spill into another thread and cause havoc over there.
I agree with what Mission said as far as new members. If they come and see 10 current threads and they see 3 political ones, 2 gun law ones, and a food one they are probably not going to stick around.
So with all that rambling I would like a happy medium. Make a list of banned topics and that list can be expanded at any time but still allow some of the light hearted miscellaneous talk.
I'm inclined to agree. I will miss the weight loss stuff and random pet peeves and tip debates and people telling little stories from their own lives.
One way to your goal might be this:
1 No political threads. 2. No derailments, strictly enforced.
One of the forums I was on that closed was the Dan Carlin history forum. At one point, it was an amazing place full of incredibly well-read, knowledgeable and thoughtful people who liked going outside the box. The best way to explain it is that Face would have fit right in.
Part of the problem with extremists is that they are consumed. So they are the loudest. It was only a handful of posters, but there was a neo-nazi/white supremacist and you couldn't go a day without seeing someone, say, draw up their proposals for dividing the united states into different race based nations. A few guys with very serious issues with women spewing daily bile. There was also an SJW or two going on about how whites are born evil whatever. (For whatever reason, those people aren't on forums so much as places like Twitter, which I now rarely use because of them).
Slowly, the normal people just stopped coming. I'd guess because it simply became an unpleasant experience. Dan himself was once an avid poster and stopped entirely. Then Dan shut it down. If you read between the lines, it was just something he didn't want to be associated with any longer. Dan and the forum were also die hard free speechers, but it's kind of another kettle of fish when your name is on it and you are facilitating and paying for it.
I wonder if Mike feels the same way. If so, I think he will find this move liberating.
Quote: WizardThank you! How this idea escapes the anti-Nathan sect escapes me.
That is funny you should say that on a thread which discusses ending threads which can just be IGNORED! Easier than ignoring Nathan! Blocking someone who others do not ignore makes threads too disjointed, as you know.
Anyway, your house, your rules. Just going to be far less interesting.... far less visited....
Why not demand that members refrain from using thumbnails of a political or provocative nature? Not ban them, just change their imago. I target EvenBob and ams88 and MaxPen and AZDuffman, as well as myself. Also « fag flags » or product ads, for example.
PS. Fag flag is not offensive. I first heard it from gay friends using the term for fun, here.
Quote: sammydv
2. Wouldn't this also cause a drop of already lower readership?
If it dies, at least it will die a gambling forum. Besides, we're more likely to be active in gambling-related threads, even if it comes at the expense of being less active overall.
Quote:3. What would the criteria for non gambling topic be?
... Is collecting poker chips about gambling?
... Is traveling to foreign locations and discussing food deals gambling.
... Is threads about wov reunions and how much chicken nuggets in a eating contest gambling?
... Is blogs about vegas shows gambling? Will all threads about vegas things to do be removed?
... Is Epsteins suicide about gambling?
Poker is a form of gambling.
Wizard has stated that something like the food thread is not going to be heavily policed in this regard. I wouldn't necessarily create a new thread for it unless at least part of the overall trip involves gambling.
I believe people were betting on the chicken nuggets contests, so I don't see how that wouldn't qualify as gambling. WoV is a gambling forum, the meet-ups tend to involve gambling in some way, so I fail to see how that wouldn't constitute gambling.
Vegas threads are expressly permitted, regardless of whether or not they are related directly to gambling.
Who is Epstein?
Quote:Some topics garner interests as a aside of gambling but derive from a gambling topic. Some don't and are born on their own. It seems to me, to attempt to stop this free flow of discussions from gambling offshoots topics would be to shoot ones foot off to stop athletes foot from spreading.
When I was an Administrator, I tried to respect and find a difference between the complete derailment of a thread and a conversation simply taking its natural course. I should hope that is the case.
Quote:Perhaps instead, in addition to having the 'off topic' section, which wov has already, remove that topic description from the landing page and have it as a link instead where people will only see the off topic titles after they further click that link. Only show the gambling titles on the landing page.
I like that suggestion, but only to the extent that we had politics and religion threads. I don't think something like the Miscellaneous Discussion Thread showing up to anyone who visits is a bad thing.
Quote:One thing to keep in mind, wov will not be able to stop the internet machine from finding any topic that was posted to wov. Wov could stop web crawling from happening with coding in the web site headings however.
I don't think that's the goal. I think the goal is to focus mostly on gambling in the future and not at all on politics or religion.
Quote:It wasn't lost on me that a suggestion was to take further discussions to another semi related web site.
It will be interesting how this plays out.
It's related to the extent that it consists mostly of people who are/were members here. As its own website, it does not advertise for any other gambling sites and is non-competing, as a result.
Quote: SOOPOOThat is funny you should say that on a thread which discusses ending threads which can just be IGNORED! Easier than ignoring Nathan! Blocking someone who others do not ignore makes threads too disjointed, as you know.
Anyway, your house, your rules. Just going to be far less interesting.... far less visited....
This is a forum for gambling discussion and should appear as such to those visiting. I think the bigger issue here is those who are not yet members rather than those who are.
Typical. The problem is not free speech ; it is monopolizing the speech .Quote: RigondeauxSlowly, the normal people just stopped coming. I'd guess because it simply became an unpleasant experience.
. Dan and the forum were also die hard free speechers, but it's kind of another kettle of fish when your name is on it and you are facilitating and paying for it .
The website offers gambling information. I came for gambling info. I found enough to interest me even in just two threads to sign on. I was fully aware of almost all the other topics on this site. I also signed on for a stock reason.
If it was only gambling, I would have still signed on. I'm actually insulted that you feel people and myself are not capable of deciding whether to stick around regardless what the other topics, which by the way, I DON'T HAVE TO READ or even pay attention to.
Are you to decide what is a controversial topic is. Who is? What is controversial?
As I said, the forum owners can design the pages any way they want. They can make it look like gambling only by having a single link to 'Off Topic' threads and NOT having off topic threads show up on the main gambling pages.
When one clicks the off topic link, then they will see the most active off topic treads in the sub menu.
This way the owners aren't censoring free thought, just making us hit a couple more links to find it. Just massaging the landing page a bit doesn't have to be insidious.
Just dress up the presentation to show all gambling info. Window dressing, not censorship.
But people claiming seeing scary topics and off topic gambling will stop them from finding gambling topics is a slap at mine or any readers intelligence.
We don't need people holding our adult hands when surfing the internet. And speculating because someone sees a political thread they are not going to stay.
Quote: SOOPOOThat is funny you should say that on a thread which discusses ending threads which can just be IGNORED! Easier than ignoring Nathan! Blocking someone who others do not ignore makes threads too disjointed, as you know.
Anyway, your house, your rules. Just going to be far less interesting.... far less visited....
When members who join or view the forum to discuss the topic that the place was originally designed for , are compelled to block 7 out of 10 threads, the problem has become bigger than just a thread blocking remedy can resolve.
If I joined a politics based message board and began posting threads about my thoughts on the house edge for Let It Ride side bets, do you think the forum mods would handle it by advising everyone to block my thread ?
time travel, history, etc etc, hundreds of
them, will they be closed also because
they aren't gambling related?
And what exactly does THAT have to do with wizards thread about a new rule, incidentally, ironically this thread is related to hijacking and unrelated gambling comments such as yours.
How does one report a poster on this gambling forum anyways?
Quote: SOOPOOThat is funny you should say that on a thread which discusses ending threads which can just be IGNORED! Easier than ignoring Nathan! Blocking someone who others do not ignore makes threads too disjointed, as you know.
Anyway, your house, your rules. Just going to be far less interesting.... far less visited....
The continued coddling of “Nathan” by the Wizard probably deserves its own forum. Truly makes zero sense to me.
Quote: michael99000When members who join or view the forum to discuss the topic that the place was originally designed for , are compelled to block 7 out of 10 threads, the problem has become bigger than just a thread blocking remedy can resolve.
I am no computer expert, but I 'think' it should be quite easy to have only gambling/vegas type threads come up in the list on page 1 which we all click on. Just make it 'a little hidden' and leave it alone. I think that's already been done with some types of threads, no?
How difficult is it to click on the "blackjack forum" if you are interested in blackjack stuff? I do think the moderators could do a bit more to prevent thread hijacking, though....
Quote: sammydv
If it was only gambling, I would have still signed on. I'm actually insulted that you feel people and myself are not capable of deciding whether to stick around regardless what the other topics, which by the way, I DON'T HAVE TO READ or even pay attention to.
I apologize if I insulted you, my implication was not aimed at you personally. Speaking only for myself, if I had come here for the first time today and saw the Recent Threads list I saw earlier, there's no way I would have signed up.
Quote:Are you to decide what is a controversial topic is. Who is? What is controversial?
Some gambling issues can be controversial, that would be a fun thread.
Quote:As I said, the forum owners can design the pages any way they want. They can make it look like gambling only by having a single link to 'Off Topic' threads and NOT having off topic threads show up on the main gambling pages.
When one clicks the off topic link, then they will see the most active off topic treads in the sub menu.
This way the owners aren't censoring free thought, just making us hit a couple more links to find it. Just massaging the landing page a bit doesn't have to be insidious.
Again, I do not necessarily disagree with your suggestion.
As far as censoring is concerned, this website is fully within its rights to censor anything it wants to and restrict any sort of content that it desires.
Quote:Just dress up the presentation to show all gambling info. Window dressing, not censorship.
But people claiming seeing scary topics and off topic gambling will stop them from finding gambling topics is a slap at mine or any readers intelligence.
We don't need people holding our adult hands when surfing the internet. And speculating because someone sees a political thread they are not going to stay.
As far as censoring is concerned, this website is fully within its rights to censor anything it wants to and restrict any sort of content that it desires.
See above. I would not have looked at that Recent Threads list and signed up today had it been my first visit to the forums. I should assume that I am not the only person on Earth who feels that way, but maybe I am.
Quote: EvenBobWill all the threads on movies, climate change,
time travel, history, etc etc, hundreds of
them, will they be closed also because
they aren't gambling related?
Do you intend on posting in them to bring them back to the top? I think I may still have thread closing abilities as a carryover of my permissions that I need to be able to edit articles.
Quote: DRichTomorrows breakfast will be a slurry of Propofol and other anesthetics for surgery.
What are you going under the knife for? Whatever it is, may the operation be successful and the recovery short.
Quote: BozThe continued coddling of “Nathan” by the Wizard probably deserves its own forum. Truly makes zero sense to me.
Ironically, the very solution that people are proposing here so politics threads won't be removed is the same solution that could have been used here as relates Nathan.
Quote: EvenBobWill all the threads on movies, climate change,
time travel, history, etc etc, hundreds of
them, will they be closed also because
they aren't gambling related?
Problem threads will be closed if I see them bubble up to the "recent threads" list. I'm not going to close the thousands of political threads on the site by hand.
Quote: WizardWhat are you going under the knife for? Whatever it is, may the operation be successful and the recovery short.
+1
Quote: kubikulannOn a seemingly different perspective, but it can help.
Why not demand that members refrain from using thumbnails of a political or provocative nature? Not ban them, just change their imago. I target EvenBob and ams88 and MaxPen and AZDuffman, as well as myself. Also « fag flags » or product ads, for example.
PS. Fag flag is not offensive. I first heard it from gay friends using the term for fun, here.
I have never heard the term "fag flag", but whatever you call it, how is a pride flag offensive or provocative?
I think more people should be encouraged to use avatars. I am somebody who does not like anonymity, so I think it is commendable when people use real names and pictures and views in their avatar....
There are already reasonable restrictions on avatars (the obvious ones), why put on any more? (there are already restriction on advertising without mod permission, so presumably people with ads in their avatars have permission, if not, then that is up to the mods to crack down on, no need for a blanket ban)….
Quote: WizardWhat are you going under the knife for? Whatever it is, may the operation be successful and the recovery short.
Just a spinal fusion. It is a common surgery with 80%-85% success.
Quote: CyrusVsnip...> such a turn off and many give this board a wide berth having to trawl though some of the non-gambling crap that permeates this board. <
Really, what's the real problem here? Considering the off topic is at the very bottom of the landing page in the first place, I don't have to 'trawl' through a thing.
I can easily scroll down through the gambling threads with no problem, never even hitting the off topic threads.
Going to the off topics is my choice and I don't need a website telling me what I can't read or deciding for me what I'm capable of reading. To do so smacks just like censorship and controlling media.
Is it me or my pop up blockers blocking all the online casino junk, that I now see only one thread listed in most active? Did admin actually read one of my posts?
Funny, but that Casino chip thread is very popular, but isn't it off topic?
Quote: Mission146It sounds like we may see you posting here more often, that would certainly be welcome!
I would like to, it's unlikely, too much prejudice here towards the game of Baccarat,, which I probably have a lot more success than many of the BJ aficionados that proliferate this site. And before any bigots chime in, no I can not predict which side will win next (I don't need to) and no I do not track or look for patterns.
Quote: ams288Is anyone actually going to be posting here more now than they did previously?
The site should be about quality and not content. Given your 100,000 life time of posts, what have you ever posted that could be deemed of value to anybody else, a single gambling related post will do.
Quote: Mission146IPOLITICAL POSTS HAVE NO VALUE TO A GAMBLING FORUM, GAMBLING POSTS DO
Very well said Mission, hope the owners stick to their pledge. This used to be a good, "go to" gambling site for info, instead its become a cess pool for bigots, homophobes and long standing members to push political agenda. On a gambling site!!!!
Quote: sammydv
Going to the off topics is my choice and I don't need a website telling me what I can't read or deciding for me what I'm capable of reading. To do so smacks just like censorship and controlling media.
Nobody is telling you what you can and can't read, the website is telling you what you can't post.
Quote:Funny, but that Casino chip thread is very popular, but isn't it off topic?
I think you're right. Casinos and chips obviously have nothing to do with gambling.
Quote: WizardProblem threads will be closed if I see them bubble up to the "recent threads" list. I'm not going to close the thousands of political threads on the site by hand.
I'd delete them, piss off even more those that contributed to the crap on an inappropriate forum, but that's just me.
Take no prisoners, just like the casinos. they don't give a damn about peoples feelings when they take their cash, so who cares about hurts feelings on a GAMBLING forum.
Quote: CyrusVI would like to, it's unlikely, too much prejudice here towards the game of Baccarat,, which I probably have a lot more success than many of the BJ aficionados that proliferate this site. And before any bigots chime in, no I can not predict which side will win next (I don't need to) and no I do not track or look for patterns.
Feel free to start a new Baccarat thread that discusses your play. Are you a high-limit player who can work the loss rebates? Do your match play kickbacks exceed your expected loss? If it somehow constitutes a betting system, or could, then it would be better put in that sub-forum, of course. Otherwise, I think there may be a sub-forum for Baccarat. I'm honestly not sure, I'm here enough that I tend to just use the Recent Threads list for everything..
Quote:The site should be about quality and not content. Given your 100,000 life time of posts, what have you ever posted that could be deemed of value to anybody else, a single gambling related post will do.
I agree with the first sentence. To the second, AMS288 has had some quality gambling posts here.
Quote:Very well said Mission, hope the owners stick to their pledge. This used to be a good, "go to" gambling site for info, instead its become a cess pool for bigots, homophobes and long standing members to push political agenda. On a gambling site!!!!
Let's hope so! I'm definitely 100% on board with this change.
Quote: WizardI think we all know the purpose of the rule. Posts on where and what DRich ate for lunch are not the problem. Posts about sexuality, politics, and religion will get the greatest scrutiny, in that order.
Cool. That's what I was thinking and hoping for, just wanted to make sure.
Quote: DRichJust a spinal fusion. It is a common surgery with 80%-85% success.
Good luck. That success rate is a bit low for "common" for my taste. Last spinal work I got done turned me off for life.
Quote: Mission146Ironically, the very solution that people are proposing here so politics threads won't be removed is the same solution that could have been used here as relates Nathan.
Incorrect!! Blocking a thread is easy, and does not make the experience of participating in another thread you enjoy less enjoyable. Blocking a single poster makes the thread you WANT to participate in disjointed and not enjoyable.
Quote: SOOPOOI am no computer expert, but I 'think' it should be quite easy to have only gambling/vegas type threads come up in the list on page 1 which we all click on. .
It’s been suggested multiple times.
And if anyone would complain it wouldn’t work, then they can explain how you don’t actually have to go looking for threads to be upset about.
All your gambling threads up top. Voila!
Quote: WizardProblem threads will be closed
Need clarification. Just political and
PC threads and religion threads
will be blocked? We can still talk
about Bitcoin, and unicycles, and
movies, and eclipses, and Walmart,
and pet peeves, and the myriad of
other topics? Or is it to gambling
only, 99% of the time.
Quote: SOOPOOIncorrect!! Blocking a thread is easy, and does not make the experience of participating in another thread you enjoy less enjoyable. Blocking a single poster makes the thread you WANT to participate in disjointed and not enjoyable.
Maybe. I haven't done either to know, that I recall.
Quote: EvenBobNeed clarification. Just political and
PC threads and religion threads
will be blocked? We can still talk
about Bitcoin, and unicycles, and
movies, and eclipses, and Walmart,
and pet peeves, and the myriad of
other topics? Or is it to gambling
only, 99% of the time.
Bitcoin and stocks would be considered gambling, I would think. In either case, you're buying something with an uncertain financial outcome.
Quote: Mission146Bitcoin and stocks would be considered gambling, I would think. In either case, you're buying something with an uncertain financial outcome.
That doesn't answer my question at
all. What about all the other non
controversial non gambling topics,
are they or are they not allowed.
Quote: AZDuffmanI haven't seen people this over upset about an announcement since they stopped making Oldsmobiles Pontiacs.
I fixed that for you..
Quote: Mission146Wizard has stated that something like the food thread is not going to be heavily policed in this regard.
ohhhhh I can see it now.....
"Make sure you use real butter or it won't taste right"
"That's stupid. Everyone knows you should use olive oil".
"You're both idiots. Margarine is the healthiest thing to use"
"Only a jackass would use margarine"
"You must be a fat-ass eating all that butter".
"At least I don't have BDS (Butter Derangement Syndrome)
"Yea, but you think "Fine dinning" is McDonalds"
"It's better than that slop you write about"
Quote: kubikulannTypical. The problem is not free speech ; it is monopolizing the speech .
Perhaps it could more correctly be thought of as monetizing free speech.
Quote: Mission146Nobody is telling you what you can and can't read, the website is telling you what you can't post.
I think you're right. Casinos and chips obviously have nothing to do with gambling.
First, somehow the post I was referencing to was soopoo and it didn't quote right and I wasn't responding to you so far I believe.
But about the crack about casinos and chips. Collecting chips isn't related to gambling except in the most thinly dangling way. The chip represents a wager. The chip itself is a token. The chip is a convenience, it's advertising. It's not instrumental to gambling.
Such as a thread about chicken dinners and recipes and what fork I'm eating with. The fork doesn't relate to a recipe nor chicken final product. It is a tool that I used.
I can walk in to a casino tonight and buy a chip and walk out. How is that related to gambling?
As a result, new viewers of the site will likely find what that they were looking for when they clicked the search link...I can't imagine what goes through the mind of a new visitor that clicks the link at the bottom of the WoO site and ends up seeing the cesspool that is Recent Threads. Those new visitors certainly won't stay/join as new members if they are interested in gambling.
I would broaden the Forum Topics to include threads like SooPoo's Portfolio thread...basically topics involving money and risk which certainly investing & gambling have in common. Look at how many Wall St. guys play poker! I was going to start a thread on NHL Futures, but decided why bother as the thread would get buried instantly by the onslaught of new political threads and get no responses...and I know, no one likes the NHL anyway except for PokerGrinder (Go Jets Go...and what happened to Helle last season?) plus a few other members that slip my mind right now.
Some old gambling-centric posters will return and/or post more of what is happening in the gaming world both from an innovation and current events standpoint. I certainly don't post here much anymore because the majority of the posters here don't care about gambling topics (and I know plenty of others in the innovation world that feel the same).
Wiz, simultaneously with banning political topics here, close down DT and start up WizardofPolitics.com site. Charge a $2/month subscription price. You'd make money and the portion of Wov that likes the political discussion along with the DT only members may jump over there because they like the current political community/banter and are familiar with the website set up. Give these members what they want & charge them for it because advertisers likely won't be that interested in paying to be there. You could force members to internally confidentially disclose (e.g. no other member sees the disclosure) their political leaning upon sign up and if enough of both sides of the political spectrum vote a member off the island as abusive, that member gets banned. You could even pay a moderator with a portion of the subscription dollhairs. $0.07/day is a small price to pay if the alternative is to quit their daily posting addiction...I'd expect a high conversion rate to the modest subscription price model.
It will be a long transition Wiz, but it is time to take back control of what this Forum was intended to be...and maybe you create an even better place for the political posters to have their own site and make some money for providing the experience.
Quote: sammydv
But about the crack about casinos and chips. Collecting chips isn't related to gambling except in the most thinly dangling way. The chip represents a wager. The chip itself is a token. The chip is a convenience, it's advertising. It's not instrumental to gambling.
Okay, I'll be sure to let the grocery store know I wish to trade my cash for chips to make my purchases. Do you think Kroger has black chips? My big shopping trips usually come out to over a hundred, so that should be convenient.
You collect chips from casinos. Other than resort fees, I would think casinos are known more for gambling than anything else. I would think that makes collecting chips very much a gambling-related activity particularly appropriate for a gambling-related forum. In fact, I believe it was Doc in that thread who says he prefers to make a bet in the casino if possible when collecting a chip, but will just go and purchase them and leave if that's not an option at the time.
Quote:Such as a thread about chicken dinners and recipes and what fork I'm eating with. The fork doesn't relate to a recipe nor chicken final product. It is a tool that I used.
I can walk in to a casino tonight and buy a chip and walk out. How is that related to gambling?
Yeah, how are casinos related to gambling? Good question. I can't imagine what the two have to do with one another. I could go buy a gift card to a restaurant and walk out. What do restaurants have to do with dining out?
Quote: ChumpChangeI'm gonna figure 95% of poker players are Trumpers, because that's what they were (before they even knew about Trump as a politician) on a Usenet poker group 15 years ago before Bush banned internet poker. Poker players were so butthurt when Bush came after them, and it was too late.
Bush did not ban online Poker, all the Bill that he signed (not drafted) did was reaffirm that it was illegal to use the internet to place bets in states where gambling was illegal. Essentially making online gambling regulated at the state level. This is why states like NV, NJ, DE have online casinos that require you to be in state boundaries to play, just like you would have to be within state boundries to open a casino or place a bet at the casino.
I personally like it, I only trust casinos run by state regulated entities, no shady organization encouraging bitcoin deposits....
Probably. Some of the lifestyle threads were mildly diverting and some were quite interesting but the political threads were too many, too strident and the posters involved knew it. So we reap what they knowingly sowed.Quote: RigondeauxProbably for the best. Of course, it will mean the forum will be on life support.
Perhaps the online casinos this site supports get more financial support from the variety of novices that show up than your common gambler.
