New Rule
Quote: MaxPenThe ones in charge decide of course. Pretty much all people want to do today is put others in confined boxes because they disagree with them and want to stifle their perspective from being heard or seen. I find that those with supposed liberal progressive viewpoints are the most guilty of this. You may be an anomaly in a sea of wannabe controllers.
Would click thank-you button twice if I could.
Quote: terapinedI have always supported free speech. KKK or Nazis want to hold a rally and yelling "Jews will not replace us" I totally support that free speech right. I lean left and I totally support that right
but
This web site is private property. There is absolutely no free speech right on private property. Whole different ballgame
Kinda funny. Not ha ha funny, just funny. But you libs sure like to talk about Nazis. The Nazis were defeated 80 years ago and you are still whining about them. Maybe you see a Nazi under every bed. But the communists, who murdered 10X as many innocent people as the Nazis did, still exist. They exist big time. And I never hear you Fredos say squat about them. Funny.
Quote: terapinedDo you actually read source material or just believe a false description and because its Briebart, you will believe their lies. Sad
????????
Racist??????
I read the NY times article and watched the NY Times video
Its about the history of grass lawns.
Its interesting
BUT
Nowhere in the in the article says lawns are racist
Its simply about lawns. Breibart describes it as an expose. WTF. Its lawns. There is nothing to expose. Its a boring subject
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/09/video/lawn-grass-environment-history.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytimes
"“These lawns come on the backs of slaves,” he continues, zooming in on a painting of George Washington in a field to highlight men cutting the grass with scythes. “It’s grueling, endless work.”
“By the 1870s we also see American culture slowly start to embrace lawns for the privileged masses,” he states."
Quote: bobbartopKinda funny. Not ha ha funny, just funny. But you libs sure like to talk about Nazis. The Nazis were defeated 80 years ago and you are still whining about them. Maybe you see a Nazi under every bed. But the communists, who murdered 10X as many innocent people as the Nazis did, still exist. They exist big time. And I never hear you Fredos say squat about them. Funny.
"Jews will not replace us" is from Charlottesville, not 80 years ago
I absolutely agree with you regarding the horrors under Stalin and Mao. Millions of lives lost. Its not funny.
We need to get behind the freedom protesters in Hong Kong.
Quote: SanchoPanza"“These lawns come on the backs of slaves,” he continues, zooming in on a painting of George Washington in a field to highlight men cutting the grass with scythes. “It’s grueling, endless work.”
“By the 1870s we also see American culture slowly start to embrace lawns for the privileged masses,” he states."
???????
Its all true and does not make todays lawns racist
You must see racism everywhere assuming you believe Maxpen's statement. sad
???Quote: ams288The s*** I’m taking is mostly coming from members I’ve never even heard of before today. Cyrus.... who? “Puckerbutt”? What?!
I actually agree with your position on the new rule so you're "taking" what I'm not giving. I merely made a comment within the confines of this new great leap forward.
Quote: EvenBobI'm still not understanding this. All the
myriad of threads that deal with TV
shows, climate change, how hot is
it today, unicycles, movies, Bitcoin,
on and on. It's still OK to post in
those threads because they aren't
political or religious?
Well...
Quote: WizardAfter some discussion, site ownership and management have decided to make a new rule forbidding non-gambling and non-Vegas topics, especially those concerning politics, religion, and sexuality.
"Forbidding non-gambling and non-Vegas" is pretty self explanatory. For the grey areas that I can see, I'll adjust like this...
I would define elections wagers as gambling, and understand this would/may invite discussion of actual policy. An example of what I would deem "appropriate" would be explaining why a pol's policy will result in an effect which will cause "x", where "x" is the event being bet on. This I would argue falls under fair discussion of details or circumstances of the bet. The addition of fanfare, derision, or derailment into specifics of the topic would be viewed as political, and assuming the thread was gambling in nature, the posters banned and the thread continued.
Another example in an attempt to clarify (and remember this is just my preliminary understanding that could be struck down), discussion about stock prognosticating based on info that is political, religious, or sexual in nature would/should follow the same. Stating that investing in XXX med firm due to advances in stem cell thanks to legal abortion, for example, would be simply discussing details of stock trading. Campaigning or politicking about abortion itself would/should summon the banhammer.
Bitcoin, I would argue, is speculation. I don't think any here argue that all investing is gambling. It (IMO) stays.
Climate change, perhaps, has a place if/when speaking about how it relates to a gamble, which it could in the cases of stocks or real estate. If done in this manner, then it is gambling discussion and fair. If not, ban.
This isn't an official statement. Just my understanding and intended plan of action.
Quote: bobbartopAnd I never hear you Fredos say squat about them. Funny.
Are you pretending to be sly or clever with the Fredos reference. Seems like neither.
Quote: FaceWell...
"Forbidding non-gambling and non-Vegas" is pretty self explanatory. For the grey areas that I can see, I'll adjust like this...
I would define elections wagers as gambling, and understand this would/may invite discussion of actual policy. An example of what I would deem "appropriate" would be explaining why a pol's policy will result in an effect which will cause "x", where "x" is the event being bet on. This I would argue falls under fair discussion of details or circumstances of the bet. The addition of fanfare, derision, or derailment into specifics of the topic would be viewed as political, and assuming the thread was gambling in nature, the posters banned and the thread continued.
Another example in an attempt to clarify (and remember this is just my preliminary understanding that could be struck down), discussion about stock prognosticating based on info that is political, religious, or sexual in nature would/should follow the same. Stating that investing in XXX med firm due to advances in stem cell thanks to legal abortion, for example, would be simply discussing details of stock trading. Campaigning or politicking about abortion itself would/should summon the banhammer.
Bitcoin, I would argue, is speculation. I don't think any here argue that all investing is gambling. It (IMO) stays.
Climate change, perhaps, has a place if/when speaking about how it relates to a gamble, which it could in the cases of stocks or real estate. If done in this manner, then it is gambling discussion and fair. If not, ban.
This isn't an official statement. Just my understanding and intended plan of action.
Who cares? I don't think you're really going to have to worry about it much. Most of the free thinkers and individualists are going to move on. I know I won't be doing anything, anymore than maybe checking in once a week to see what's new. Might find a topic or two that interests me a couple times a year but pretty sure that will be it.
Most people with libertarian mindsets tend not to support a whole lot of groupthink BS. Having to tow some sort of subjective line sounds like misery. Screw that, there's tons of other places to frequent in this world.
This site was good because it had rules formed around mutual respect but didn't try to influence subject matter. There was plenty of biased moderation of those rules but it was tolerable. Unfortunately, like most things today, this site will be stepping closer into the world of communism at 8 AM tomorrow morning. You should give members social ratings....lol
I am thankful that I had the chance to meet some of the great people that I have as a result of this sites existence. I can honestly say that some of the friendships resulting from that have changed my life for the better. I predict this place will become a shadow of its former self. Each additional rule implemented has proven that to be true thus far. This one is a real game changer. That's probably why it was left open to be changed back. It's hard to retreat though once you take that fork in the road.
Quote: MaxPenWho cares?
EB asked. Felt a duty to answer
Quote: MaxPenMay the WoV rest in peace. Can probably follow the whole site with just a weekly check in soon.
That's mostly what I do now. About 2x a week really. And the only thing that really has tons of posts in those peeks is political stuff. And I fall behind on that because I don't want to read 30 minutes about "I love Trump and Republicans/I hate Trump and Republicans" to catch up.
Quote: EvenBobI'm still not understanding this. All the
myriad of threads that deal with TV
shows, climate change, how hot is
it today, unicycles, movies, Bitcoin,
on and on. It's still OK to post in
those threads because they aren't
political or religious?
Climate Change is totally political. It's just as bad as a Trump thread. Generally speaking...
Trumpers = Climate Change scientists lie to try to get funding.
Non-Trumpers = Climate Change scientists are like most scientists and try to find the truth.
Quote: JoelDezeAll I can say is thank you. I'm happy with the change. I always liked the "miserable users" add on from vbulletin when I used to build add ons for that software. If a user became a miserable user, they wouldn't be blocked or banned at all. Instead the following happened:
When classed as miserable, a member suffers ;
1. Slow response (time delay) on every page (20 to 60 seconds default).
2. A chance they will get the "server busy" message (50% by default).
3. A chance that no search facilities will be available (75% by default).
4. A chance they will get redirected to another preset page (25% & homepage by default).
5. A chance they will simply get a blank page (25% by default).
6. Post flood limit increased by a defined factor (10 times by default).
7. If they get past all this okay, then they will be served up their proper page.
Yep, that can work.
Quote: FaceEB asked. Felt a duty to answer
And I received a totally different
answer from a mod in a PM.
There you go, then..
But if the new rule is struck down after the test run , then I think the "Recent Threads" section should be split into "Recent Gambling Threads" and then further down the page, it should have "Recent Non-Gambling Threads".
note: I only read 5 - 6 pages into this thread, so I don't know if someone already mentioned this or a similar idea.
Quote: MaxPenWho cares? I don't think you're really going to have to worry about it much. Most of the free thinkers and individualists are going to move on. I know I won't be doing anything, anymore than maybe checking in once a week to see what's new. Might find a topic or two that interests me a couple times a year but pretty sure that will be it.
"The free thinkers and individualists," wow! I should think so highly of myself one day to describe myself and those I know that way. We're all programmed one way or another and everything that we do and say is nothing more than the response that has been conditioned out of us. Don't get me wrong, there's a probabilistic element such that we might choose from one of two or more with probability a, probability b, probability c (with varying degrees of likelihood and pick one), but that everything we do at a given time is limited to a few select choices is automatic.
Anyway, I guess we'll see you next Wednesday. Have a good week until then.
Quote:Most people with libertarian mindsets tend not to support a whole lot of groupthink BS. Having to tow some sort of subjective line sounds like misery. Screw that, there's tons of other places to frequent in this world.
It's not very subjective, or, doesn't have to be. Don't discuss politics, sexuality or religion. There. You're inside the line.
Quote:This site was good because it had rules formed around mutual respect but didn't try to influence subject matter. There was plenty of biased moderation of those rules but it was tolerable. Unfortunately, like most things today, this site will be stepping closer into the world of communism at 8 AM tomorrow morning. You should give members social ratings....lol
Yes, R.I.P. to a relatively good politics forum. Let us now gather and celebrate as a good gambling forum is reborn.
What the hell does Communism have to do with anything? This. Is. Not. A. Politics. Forum. It's a gambling forum. We're not censoring the nature of the political discourse, we're getting rid of it. Go improve the political discussion at DiversityTomorrow if you want something to do, I'm sure Wizard would appreciate you being there.
Even if your number of visits plummets, I should imagine the number of gambling posts you make will be the same. Close to zero.
Quote:I am thankful that I had the chance to meet some of the great people that I have as a result of this sites existence. I can honestly say that some of the friendships resulting from that have changed my life for the better. I predict this place will become a shadow of its former self. Each additional rule implemented has proven that to be true thus far. This one is a real game changer. That's probably why it was left open to be changed back. It's hard to retreat though once you take that fork in the road.
Yes, whatever would a professional gambler have to discuss on a gambling forum? Vaya con dios and see you next Wednesday.
Quote: tringlomaneThat's mostly what I do now. About 2x a week really. And the only thing that really has tons of posts in those peeks is political stuff. And I fall behind on that because I don't want to read 30 minutes about "I love Trump and Republicans/I hate Trump and Republicans" to catch up.
You just caught yourself up, though. I love Trump/I Hate Trump is the entire substance of those threads. My political posts were long and often contain researched information, so only two or three people read those. You really don't have to read the whole thing, just skip to the last page, hit quote on any random post and go from there. I could spend a day talking to a lampost and it would be more responsive to my ideas, the light would turn on and back off eventually. I would take that as an acknowledgment that it was listening.
Quote: ksdjdjI agree that this site should be mainly about gambling and/or Vegas.
But if the new rule is struck down after the test run , then I think the "Recent Threads" section should be split into "Recent Gambling Threads" and then further down the page, it should have "Recent Non-Gambling Threads".
note: I only read 5 - 6 pages into this thread, so I don't know if someone already mentioned this or a similar idea.
It's been mentioned. I think the non-gambling shouldn't get a list at all and only get one sub-forum that you have to be logged in to even see, if that ends up happening. My original suggestion was just to keep it off Recent Threads list, but I would definitely go a step further and make it so you have to be logged in to see off-topic threads.
Personally, I hope the new rule never gets struck down.
Quote: Mission146"The free thinkers and individualists," wow! I should think so highly of myself one day to describe myself and those I know that way. We're all programmed one way or another and everything that we do and say is nothing more than the response that has been conditioned out of us. Don't get me wrong, there's a probabilistic element such that we might choose from one of two or more with probability a, probability b, probability c (with varying degrees of likelihood and pick one), but that everything we do at a given time is limited to a few select choices is automatic.
I imagine your life is pretty problematic with that thought process and attitude. Don't worry,,, you're just a victim of your circumstance, you can't help yourself.....lol
I find it interesting and ironic that in this thread, we’re talking about a new rule stating that topics and posts are to remain on topic, yet there are so many replies that are off topic and even the kind that would get deleted based upon this very rule.
That said, I like the new rule, if it could be adhered to.
Death of WoV? I don’t think so. I think will actually help. After all, if most/all of the info here is the kind that people are looking for, more people will look and more people will post.
DT is dead? Not quite. But if all of the traffic here that should be over there starts going there, DT will be a very active forum.
Would prefer Libertine, though.
I think "the nail" is a difficult target but I do agree that the problem was never with the "i love/hate Trump" but in having those posts repeated time after time in every thread. I could have started a thread with nothing but one word "tunafish" and come back a week later and find a zillion posts about Liberals and Conservatives, Trumpers and Non-Trumpers, Clinton and Obama, global warming, etc.
Quote: DJTeddyBearWow! 22 pages in less than 24 hours…
I find it interesting and ironic that in this thread, we’re talking about a new rule stating that topics and posts are to remain on topic, yet there are so many replies that are off topic and even the kind that would get deleted based upon this very rule.
That said, I like the new rule, if it could be adhered to.
Death of WoV? I don’t think so. I think will actually help. After all, if most/all of the info here is the kind that people are looking for, more people will look and more people will post.
DT is dead? Not quite. But if all of the traffic here that should be over there starts going there, DT will be a very active forum.
except it won't because the majority of us who can not stand political threads won't want to wade through them over there. Every once in a while I check that site out and the top threads are nothing that I want to discuss so I move on.
Quote: MaxPenI imagine your life is pretty problematic with that thought process and attitude. Don't worry,,, you're just a victim of your circumstance, you can't help yourself.....lol
It has nothing to do with circumstance. My point is that our minds are inherently limited, which is why we, as a necessary result, cannot be aware of every possible option available to us in all instances. Because we cannot conceive of every possible option, we often miss the best possible option.
It has nothing to do with being a victim of circumstance or not taking responsibility. I'm not a victim of circumstance, I'm a victim of the fact that I'm quite unmotivated and often make bad decisions.
Of course, this is why we don't have politics threads, anymore. You know that I am more to the left than you, so anything I say is going to automatically be, "You're just a victim of your circumstance."
Naturally, I expect you to find no fault with yourself whatsoever. Really, since you're such a free thinker and individualist, and I am admittedly not, you shouldn't be wasting your time talking to peons like me.
But, since you seem incapable of making a meaningful gambling-related post, I guess you have no better way to spend the next couple hours.
Quote: WizardYou guys have one hour left to express political opinions. Make the most of it.
I did not have time to alter "tax bill" to "rule."
DON'T READ IT, IF YOU DON'T WANT TO READ IT.
(of course I exclude the mods and admin, as they have a legitimate complaint of reading stuff they don't enjoy and enforcing rules and all. But at least they have a case)
That should tell you something right there. For Better or Worse, People engage in controversial subjects.Quote: DJTeddyBearWow! 22 pages in less than 24 hours…
If gambling subjects were as polarizing and wanted as some people claim.... Take a look at and compare the flowing 2 threads.
TODAYS GAMING-NEWS. NTG May 12th, 2019 at 10:03:21 MrCasinoGames by MrCasinoGames
Aug 14 2019 02:26:35
264Replies
59186Views
I didnt look to see how many posts were made by the OP but it's probably an overwhelming majority. You actually have to search pretty hard to find a legitimate post that doesn't deal with Nathan and are some other b*******. This thread should be going of the rails with comments, but its pretty much a one man show.
-------------------
New Rule
In Topic: Announcements
starter: Wizard
Aug 14 2019 07:24:04
225Replies
6604Views
3 months of nothing but gambling subjects and theres only a handful of legit posts VS 24 hours of just one non gambling subject. Is it an unfair comparison, probably, but go compare it to any non-gambling related subject and see the results.
Personally I'm good either way, I can just go with the flow, I just think there's some middle ground that could possibly make most people happy. I still like the locked section idea with a special password to enter is needed were only people who opt-in can view or participate. That will keep everyone currently at the the site, new members wont see it, members who don't want to see it won't. The rules could be relaxed a bit and anyone who gets banned/suspended from that section would just be banned/suspended from that section. Perhaps even a special moderator just for that section would be needed.
As to content restrictions I agree there's a problem but share the concern of many that some of the ancillary threads (e.g., what people are reading, who wants to go to Burning Man) help foster a sense of community. I would miss that.
Quote: TumblingBonesSeems 90% of what the Wiz and owners want is achievable by simply filtering what shows up in the "Recent Threads"
As to content restrictions I agree there's a problem but share the concern of many that some of the ancillary threads (e.g., what people are reading, who wants to go to Burning Man) help foster a sense of community. I would miss that.
I think those are Ministry of Propaganda approved threads.
Here's the solution, and I mentioned a derivative of it early on and someone said the final later.
Just set up the landing page to show only gambling related material and active gambling threads. Don't have anything else, well, except for all the ads show up UNTIL one logs on. Then you log on and you have the ability to make whatever thread offends you to go away. Can't ever make everyone happy, but given the choice to hide things is about the only hand holding this or any site needs to do.
Period.
Simple.
Done.
You're doing a goog search for card counting and all that comes back will be Wov and gambling threads.
Would threads about what makes a professional gamble a professional be on topic? That's good for a couple hundred pages.
By the way, just looked again at a wizard post and he stated twenty four hours for 'political' comments. So on topic stuff may still be posted in this thread?
at least there's a good chance their stories about whatever they ate that day are actually real.Quote: MDawgThese guys are mostly blocked by me anyway, but I noticed that immediately after the New Rule was enacted these complete waste of time types came in desperately posting in the What did you eat today Where do you shop today and other silly threads immediately because their blocked names appeared right away to bump the threads up. Must have no other outlet, poor guys. Either that or are being deliberately obtuse and stubborn to thumb the forum's intent.
Quote: GWAEexcept it won't because the majority of us who can not stand political threads won't want to wade through them over there. Every once in a while I check that site out and the top threads are nothing that I want to discuss so I move on.
Why do you people think you have to wade through anything. Jeez. The site doesn't make you see anything you don't want to see.
Stop whining about shit that doesn't exist as a problem. People just want to censor topics, don't force your closed mind on the majority.
You should be complaining about the excessive ads.
Quote: sammydvWhy do you people think you have to wade through anything. Jeez. The site doesn't make you see anything you don't want to see.
Stop whining about shit that doesn't exist as a problem. People just want to censor topics, don't force your closed mind on the majority.
You should be complaining about the excessive ads.
Like I said earlier , go to a politics based message board and start posting threads about Video Poker return tables. See if the mods only remedy is advising everyone to block your threads
Quote: michael99000Like I said earlier , go to a politics based message board and start posting threads about Video Poker return tables. See if the mods only remedy is advising everyone to block your threads
Paytables never change. After they are all posted you run out of material. Then it's crickets and tumbleweeds. Looks like What Did You Eat Today will survive though, because that is Ministry approved off topic content. Will probably be less posts in that thread because not as many drivebys will be happening. This forum is like a a town that is being cut off from the interstate. Only its doing it to itself.
Quote: Mission146Must have been a short week.
This thread is still open and it interests me. Don't worry yourself about my activities. Trust me it's not worth it.
Quote: MaxPenPaytables never change. After they are all posted you run out of material. Then it's crickets and tumbleweeds. Looks like What Did You Eat Today will survive though, because that is Ministry approved off topic content. Will probably be less posts in that thread because not as many drivebys will be happening. This forum is like a a town that is being cut off from the interstate. Only its doing it to itself.
So if you dont come here for gambling topics why not just go to a political forum and discuss stuff there.
Especially now that political topics arent wanted anymore
Quote: WizardYou guys have one hour left to express political opinions. Make the most of it.
Longest hour ever
(And an update to #14)
Quote: darkozSo if you dont come here for gambling topics why not just go to a political forum and discuss stuff there.
Especially now that political topics arent wanted anymore
Do you go to the bus forum to discuss riding the bus. No, you discuss it here. Why? I don't care what you discuss by the way. I enjoy most of your contributions and opinions. Why do you care about what I post on? You're posts are all over the political threads. Why didn't you post on some politic forum? I don't even know any political forums. The only forums I frequent are all gambling and market related.
Quote: GandlerThose are good points, I know this rule was aimed at political threads. But, it cuts at everything that is not gaming or Vegas-tourism related.
No more food discussions, no more news, no more random stories, personal issues, etc......
Basically, I predict if this rule stays this forum will have the occasional new game thread, trip reports, the occasional betting system thread, and some random poker chatter, but it will be far fewer posts. There simply is only so much you can say about the same games (and most new threads are pretty much repeated past discussions.....)
As others have said, the most exciting thing gaming related is AP opportunities, but those threads quickly get hardballed...
I love gambling, I love blackjack, I love poker, I love the atmosphere in many casinos, but realistically speaking, the topics are minimal, and almost everything has already been said (generally many times over)....
I agree.
I think about 80 or 90% of my interest in this forum is non-gaming related. But it's admin's choice. They can modify their approach with limiting just political threads. That would be fine with me.
I would second this. Disallowing all non-Vegas/gambling threads will make the forum more of a resource in that you come here with a question, then leave with the answer. Keeping the light-hearted non-gambling threads will keep the forum a community.Quote: GreasyjohnThey can modify their approach with limiting just political threads. That would be fine with me.
As to the forum suffering if the political threads are removed, I think just the opposite. Just look at this thread the past 24-ish hours. There have been several quality posters, that I don't see very often anymore, chiming in.
Quote: AZDuffmanCLOSED!
Not..
Quote: GreasyjohnI agree.
I think about 80 or 90% of my interest in this forum is non-gaming related.
Gambling is a finite subject. When you find
your niche, which is what people are looking
for, 95% of gambling is a total bore.
