Discussion II about the Suspension List
Odds are he wasn't in great shape; he was 70; it must have been brutally hot and humid: hello, heart attack recipe.
In hindsight he (or any other retirees in that situation) should swallow their pride and hire a landscaping service to mow.
But yeah, I get it: wanting to keep busy and maintain the image of competence.
New learning can be tough.
Quote: MrVWhat was he doing mowing the yard in Fla. in August?
Odds are he wasn't in great shape; he was 70; it must have been brutally hot and humid: hello, heart attack recipe.
He was actually in good shape, no extra weight,
just had a complete physical in March. This is
something you see in movies and TV shows all
the time. Guy works all his life dreaming of
retirement, never travels or takes good vacay's,
and he drops dead shortly after his retirement
leaving behind a wealthy widow. Where is the
fairness. It's a non existent concept.
Quote: MrVWhat was he doing mowing the yard in Fla. in August?
Odds are he wasn't in great shape; he was 70; it must have been brutally hot and humid: hello, heart attack recipe.
In hindsight he (or any other retirees in that situation) should swallow their pride and hire a landscaping service to mow.
I have already told my wife that when we get to Florida in about two months that my only job is to hire the people that will be doing our work. I haven't mowed a lawn in over 30 years and am sure not going to start in Florida.
Fortunately the climate is moderate: were I in Fla. or the desert SW it would be different.
Quote: EvenBob
My brother in law... 45 years with the
same company he hated, all so he could have
a huge retirement income....
Quote: EvenBobWhy, he was independently wealthy. He started
buying rental properties in FL in the 80's, god
knows how many he had when he died..
So, which is it?
I was about to ask the same questionQuote: darkozSo, which is it?
It’s also not the Useless Life Lessons or Discussion about Fairness thread.
Can we get a blanket soft warning here not to hijack this thread?
Maybe we should rename this the, “Nobody Cares,” thread.
And after a short time with the thread going off the rails, can we please keep this thread on topic. Splitting this thread is a pain.Quote: Mission146What does any of this have to do with the Suspension List?
Maybe we should rename this the, “Nobody Cares,” thread.
Quote: darkozSo, which is it?
Hahaha.
This is why most of us just totally disregard most of EB’s anecdotes.
Quote: gordonm888Sorry about your sister's loss, EB.
Amen.
Just like a good little MOD falling in line.Quote: gordonm888Sorry about your sister's loss, EB.
Quote: gordonm888Sorry about your sister's loss, EB.
It's just part of a never-ending series of crap happening this summer. Half of the vaccinated people in my wife's family now have covid, my brother has been in the hospital for 18 days because his kidneys shut down, my brother-in-law dies on the same day I get my dog put down last week. Needless to say I ain't leaving the house.
Quote: darkozSo, which is it?
Which is what. You can buy property in another state without living in that state, you know. Some of the early property he bought in the late eighties and into the 90's has got to be worth a fortune now. This was an extremely smart guy and he was also an extreme tightwad. He lived to make money and thought he would have all the time in the world to spend it when he retired. His wife doesn't even know how much his net worth was because he never talked about it. This guy was so smart that when he got drafted as soon as he got out of college in 1972 they tested him and found he had a very high IQ so they put them in a language learning program and he learned how to speak fluent Korean in 4 months and spent his whole two-year tour in South Korea as an interpreter.
Who should we suspend for hijacking it?
😜
Quote: mwalz9To segway this thread back on topic...
Who should we suspend for hijacking it?
😜
It wasn't hijacked. We were having a discussion about fairness and now people here are always trying to get fairness when there is no such thing in the world. That topic falls under the fairness of getting suspended
Quote: EvenBobIt wasn't hijacked. We were having a discussion about fairness and now people here are always trying to get fairness when there is no such thing in the world. That topic falls under the fairness of getting suspended
I know. I was simply kidding. Sorry about your family"s loss.
Quote: EvenBobWhich is what. You can buy property in another state without living in that state, you know. Some of the early property he bought in the late eighties and into the 90's has got to be worth a fortune now. This was an extremely smart guy and he was also an extreme tightwad. He lived to make money and thought he would have all the time in the world to spend it when he retired. His wife doesn't even know how much his net worth was because he never talked about it. This guy was so smart that when he got drafted as soon as he got out of college in 1972 they tested him and found he had a very high IQ so they put them in a language learning program and he learned how to speak fluent Korean in 4 months and spent his whole two-year tour in South Korea as an interpreter.
So you are saying life treated your brother extremely fair? Life is fair?
In EB's world it doesn't seem to matter if you are rich or poor, good or bad, black or white, so long as you outlive Methuselah.
Find a cave and hunker down.
Quote: MrVNo, EB is only mentioning this guy's financial success to put in context his claim that it is unfair for him to die so soon after retirement.
In EB's world it doesn't seem to matter if you are rich or poor, good or bad, black or white, so long as you outlive Methuselah.
Find a cave and hunker down.
No, EB is only mentioning this guy's financial success because he originally said his brother worked 45 years for a company he hated.
And I pointed out if EB had the keys to financial freedom with winning Roulette strategies, EB should have offered to help his brother who was forced to work 45 years for a company he hated.
So EB needed to keep his story about always winning at roulette while not looking like a jerk for not helping his brother out who he claims life was unfair to so suddenly his brother was an "independently wealthy" guy who was gallivanting around the world buying up rental houses (which makes no sense since he was just unfairly working for a company he hated only to secure a short retirement).
Unless of course you believe that independently wealthy guys who flip houses work for companies they hate for 45 years. But then you would also have to believe that EB has Roulette strategies that work and wouldn't share them with his brother who was forced to work for 45 years regardless of his independent wealth
The brother in law came within one standard deviation of the mean average human lifespan for a U.S. citizen.
Most of what happened between birth and death was either by choice, or came as a result of a choice.
There’s nothing unfair about any of this.
*** I LIKE that the suspension list now has an area to indicate whether or not the suspension has been resolved.
And the unresolved ones are to be kept to the top, with just a little bit of editing.Quote: Mission146*** I LIKE that the suspension list now has an area to indicate whether or not the suspension has been resolved.
Quote: OnceDearAnd the unresolved ones are to be kept to the top, with just a little bit of editing.
That’s an excellent idea for the Suspension List—-that thing that this thread is about—-it sounds very convenient.
It would seem that all that’s needed is for at least one of the (now many) Mods to remember to check the list every day.
I think this will be the most helpful for longer suspensions, which sometimes tend to get buried on the list.
That was the plan. Making the 'N' red was a big change too. Probably enough for now.Quote: Mission146That’s an excellent idea for the Suspension List—-that thing that this thread is about—-it sounds very convenient.
It would seem that all that’s needed is for at least one of the (now many) Mods to remember to check the list every day.
I think this will be the most helpful for longer suspensions, which sometimes tend to get buried on the list.
Quote: darkozNo, EB is only mentioning this guy's financial success because he originally said his brother worked 45 years for a company he hated.
And I pointed out if EB had the keys to financial freedom with winning Roulette strategies, EB should have offered to help his brother who was forced to work 45 years for a company he hated.
So EB needed to keep his story about always winning at roulette while not looking like a jerk for not helping his brother out who he claims life was unfair to so suddenly his brother was an "independently wealthy" guy who was gallivanting around the world buying up rental houses (which makes no sense since he was just unfairly working for a company he hated only to secure a short retirement).
Unless of course you believe that independently wealthy guys who flip houses work for companies they hate for 45 years. But then you would also have to believe that EB has Roulette strategies that work and wouldn't share them with his brother who was forced to work for 45 years regardless of his independent wealth
This whole thing is totally wrong. Galavanting? Flipping houses?
He knew in the 80's he was retiring to FL so he started buying
rental properties. He never sold even one of them so I have no
idea where flipping comes from. This guy needed no financial
help from me. By the time I started playing roulette in 2006 he
had god knows how many properties rented and managed by
a rental management firm. What does him hating his job have
to do with anything. The guy had a genius IQ and was capable
of walking and thinking and chewing gum at the same time. He
could actually build a business in FL and still live in MI. What
a concept, huh. It will be months before his wife knows the
extent of his holdings.
Quote: EvenBobIt will be months before his wife knows the
extent of his holdings.
Sounds like it was his wife that wasn't treated fairly
Quote: darkozSounds like it was his wife that wasn't treated fairly
Because her husband didn't blab about his business projects all the time? How is that unfair. She just trusted that he knew what he was doing, what's wrong with that. Fairness has nothing to do with it.
It's also important to note that all of these Suspensions were for a finite number of days. I'm not personally inclined, but if someone were to get REALLY bored one day, it would be interesting to know how many Suspensions of a finite length of 30, or more, days have there been compared to total Suspensions. From that, we can at least come up with the probability of a finite suspension lasting at least 30 days and then, from that, get a probability of five consecutive.
Quote: Mission146I was looking at the Suspension List and it seems like when most people are going to get Suspended is random, like in gambling. Would anyone have bet on five consecutive Suspensions to last for thirty days, or more? If you scroll down to April 12th, the Suspension on that day and the following four Suspensions were all of thirty days, or more.
It's also important to note that all of these Suspensions were for a finite number of days. I'm not personally inclined, but if someone were to get REALLY bored one day, it would be interesting to know how many Suspensions of a finite length of 30, or more, days have there been compared to total Suspensions. From that, we can at least come up with the probability of a finite suspension lasting at least 30 days and then, from that, get a probability of five consecutive.
There is heteroskedasticity in the data related to the implementation then removal of the martingale policy.
Quote: unJon
There is heteroskedasticity in the data related to the implementation then removal of the martingale policy.
That's a good point. Do you recall when the Martingale policy was declared removed?
Quote: Mission146That's a good point. Do you recall when the Martingale policy was declared removed?
I think recently. OD might grace us with an answer. Can also probably derive an answer by looking at recidivists on the list.
Quote: EvenBobThis whole thing is totally wrong. Galavanting? Flipping houses?
He knew in the 80's he was retiring to FL so he started buying
rental properties. He never sold even one of them so I have no
idea where flipping comes from. This guy needed no financial
help from me. By the time I started playing roulette in 2006 he
had god knows how many properties rented and managed by
a rental management firm. What does him hating his job have
to do with anything. The guy had a genius IQ and was capable
of walking and thinking and chewing gum at the same time. He
could actually build a business in FL and still live in MI. What
a concept, huh. It will be months before his wife knows the
extent of his holdings.
Same brother you said hated being a truck driver?
I should know. But I don't. Each penalty is decided on its merits. A member doing the same minor rule breach repeatedly might still see his individual penalty incremented progressively each time, while a first offender might get off with a warning for the same offense.Quote: unJonI think recently. OD might grace us with an answer. Can also probably derive an answer by looking at recidivists on the list.
Quote: rxwineSame brother you said hated being a truck driver?
That's probably how he got around to all the property he was buying
Quote: rxwineSame brother you said hated being a truck driver?
Somebody else entirely.
Quote: EvenBobThe problem is half the time we don't even know we are posting something it's going to get a suspension. I got suspended for quoting somebody wrong. I didn't know I was quoting them wrong. Getting suspended here is at the whim of the moderator. Lots of suspensions for trolling and every moderator seems to have their own unique idea of what trolling is. There should be far more warnings and far fewer suspensions.
I think every poster should achieve some sort of rating for the quality and relevance of their posts and that should be factored into determining suspensions. A poster with a 1000 good and relevant posts should get more leeway than a poster with 50 posts and three suspensions. I am guessing it would be too much work but I think it would help.
Many of us step over the line on occasion but are otherwise decent contributors and should be coddled a bit; as for disputatious trolls and purveyors of the arcane and the absurd: give em the axe, the axe, the axe.
Quote: DRichI think every poster should achieve some sort of rating for the quality and relevance of their posts and that should be factored into determining suspensions. A poster with a 1000 good and relevant posts should get more leeway than a poster with 50 posts and three suspensions. I am guessing it would be too much work but I think it would help.
Everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others. I survived what was known as The Star Wars on another forum. Every member could rate every other and rate each thread as well. Before you knew it, people were making up multiple ids just to give themselves 5 stars and rate everyone they disagreed with one star. Alliances were formed where a brand new thread would get 25 5 star ratings the minute it was posted and many of the most popular members suddenly had low ratings. It was insane as a handful of nutjobs ran amok.
Never again.
Quote: DRichI think every poster should achieve some sort of rating for the quality and relevance of their posts and that should be factored into determining suspensions. A poster with a 1000 good and relevant posts should get more leeway than a poster with 50 posts and three suspensions. I am guessing it would be too much work but I think it would help.
As this will tend to make suspension terms appear to be determined by caprice and whimsy, some may elect to skip the fussy data analysis rating system and skip straight to the caprice and whimsy.
Fortunately, appeals are possible.
1. Good content. ( Discussions of gambling, math analyses/game theory, reports/reviews on casinos and hotels, the chips thread, discussion of new games, puzzles, helpful responses to newcomers, well written posts on topics, trip reports, NFL Picks and other contests, etc.) That list is terribly incomplete, but we all know what good content is. It is on-topic information that is well-written and consistent with the vision of the forum.
- there is off-topic content which I think of as 'pretty good content', e.g.: "What are you reading?," and threads on Covid and Leronlimnab, and discussions about collecting license plates (major suck-up alert!)
2. Comments about the WOV forum or WOO. The rules, complaining about the worthless ding-dong moderators, questions, suggestions, accessing the WOO site, reports of problems etc. This is essential, but no newcomer comes to the forum because they want to read this kind of stuff. IMO, most want to read good content.
3. Banter. Most of us do this, and banter that is civil, fun and/or humorous is good for the life of the forum.
4. Feuding and provocation. Many of us are guilty of this one from time to time, and almost every forum has this going on to some extent. But some members seem to always be provoking and finding ways within the rules of the forum to insult people or point out inconsistencies in what has been posted. And others seem to be thin-skinned and quick to call for suspensions. Some members have never typed " I am wrong" but frequently type "You are wrong." We love you all anyway, but . . . really?
*******************************************************
In poker, it is important to understand your image at the table, how others see you. As a thought exercise, let's apply that concept to the forum. What is your ratio between those four categories? Do others see you as all banter and feuding, or do they recognize that you add good content - and how often? (No need to post your own self-analysis.)
Quote: EvenBobThe problem is half the time we don't even know we are posting something it's going to get a suspension. I got suspended for quoting somebody wrong. I didn't know I was quoting them wrong. Getting suspended here is at the whim of the moderator. Lots of suspensions for trolling and every moderator seems to have their own unique idea of what trolling is. There should be far more warnings and far fewer suspensions.
I would cite one of the forum's most prolific posters with a reply:
Quote: EvenBobWhen did you ever run into anything in life that was 'fair'. It's a concept that doesn't exist in nature and one impossible to reach for man.
Best I have is that usually things aren't grossly unfair.
Quote: gordonm888I have my hands full trying to follow what is going on in WOV without looking at what people are posting on other sites. I have a life outside the internet and I just can't spend 24/7 reading other posts at other sites. So, my policy for the foreseeable future is to ignore the other sites.
As a general statement, if you want to criticize me here within WOV, go ahead and do so. As long as the tone and language don't become extreme, I'll try to listen to what you have to say.
Regarding Marcus Clark's last alleged (and still unreported) casino foray, OnceDear wrote,"Must have been good, 'coz he's still out celebrating a week later." I responded with, "Doesn't surprise me, both that he won and hasn't reported. Those Branson hookers come with a weekly rate."
Gordon then suspended me because, "Your comment does not appear to have been part of a joking, friendly exchange."
So I have a few thoughts. First of all, I think it was crystal clear the Branson crack was a joke. It obviously implies that Marcus was gambling in Branson, won as he to-this-point always has reported, and then stayed because Branson hookers have weekly rates. I don't see how this could be taken seriously as Branson HAS NO CASINOS. Now one would think a security expert employed at a midwestern casino might know this, or a mod employed by WoV might know this, but I guess not. Draw your own conclusions.
Second point. A mod suspends me for a hooker joke because someone complained it was offensive? And the same mod recommended that if people got their hands on $5 million, they should shoot for "the trifecta" involving (1) paying identical twins for sex, (2) paying a dwarf for sex, and 3) paying a double amputee for sex. I guess mods have their own definitions of offensive. I had no idea "the trifecta" was a thing.
Third point: Does gordon really believe nobody reading WoV found that post of his offensive? For personal reasons, I found it highly offensive, nauseating in fact. I have not seen a statute of limitations in the beloved rules, so allow me to file a formal complaint. I am highly offended. Perhaps gordon could suspend himself a few days.
Finally, what does it say about WoV that someone with gordon's nonchalant offensive history was chosen as a moderator? The double amputee crack suggests some sick asymmetric power fantasy. Perhaps, to some extent, moderating also fits that bill.
I'm with Bob when it comes to suspensions, WHO REALLY CARES? Too much time and effort worried about something that doesn't really affect your life.Quote: redietzRegarding Marcus Clark's last alleged (and still unreported) casino foray, OnceDear wrote,"Must have been good, 'coz he's still out celebrating a week later." I responded with, "Doesn't surprise me, both that he won and hasn't reported. Those Branson hookers come with a weekly rate."
Gordon then suspended me because, "Your comment does not appear to have been part of a joking, friendly exchange."
So I have a few thoughts. First of all, I think it was crystal clear the Branson crack was a joke. It obviously implies that Marcus was gambling in Branson, won as he to-this-point always has reported, and then stayed because Branson hookers have weekly rates. I don't see how this could be taken seriously as Branson HAS NO CASINOS. Now one would think a security expert employed at a midwestern casino might know this, or a mod employed by WoV might know this, but I guess not. Draw your own conclusions.
Second point. A mod suspends me for a hooker joke because someone complained it was offensive? And the same mod recommended that if people got their hands on $5 million, they should shoot for "the trifecta" involving (1) paying identical twins for sex, (2) paying a dwarf for sex, and 3) paying a double amputee for sex. I guess mods have their own definitions of offensive. I had no idea "the trifecta" was a thing.
Third point: Does gordon really believe nobody reading WoV found that post of his offensive? For personal reasons, I found it highly offensive, nauseating in fact. I have not seen a statute of limitations in the beloved rules, so allow me to file a formal complaint. I am highly offended. Perhaps gordon could suspend himself a few days.
Finally, what does it say about WoV that someone with gordon's nonchalant offensive history was chosen as a moderator? The double amputee crack suggests some sick asymmetric power fantasy. Perhaps, to some extent, moderating also fits that bill.
Quote: redietzRegarding Marcus Clark's last alleged (and still unreported) casino foray, OnceDear wrote,"Must have been good, 'coz he's still out celebrating a week later." I responded with, "Doesn't surprise me, both that he won and hasn't reported. Those Branson hookers come with a weekly rate."
Gordon then suspended me because, "Your comment does not appear to have been part of a joking, friendly exchange."
I'd have thought that it was a joke, so that part is fair, in my opinion. I think it's one of those where you'd kind of have to do something if MarcusClark complained or said he took it as an insult---and maybe if someone else PM'ed a complaint to a Mod---but probably not the sort of statement that I personally would have acted on without prodding.
Overall, I'd say that's one that it would have to be MarcusClark. If someone else had PM'ed me a complaint about that one, then I would PM back saying I'd do something if MarcusClark publicly complained about it.
Quote:So I have a few thoughts. First of all, I think it was crystal clear the Branson crack was a joke. It obviously implies that Marcus was gambling in Branson, won as he to-this-point always has reported, and then stayed because Branson hookers have weekly rates. I don't see how this could be taken seriously as Branson HAS NO CASINOS. Now one would think a security expert employed at a midwestern casino might know this, or a mod employed by WoV might know this, but I guess not. Draw your own conclusions.
Okay, I disagree with this specific objection for three reasons:
1.) Mods are not, 'Employed,' they volunteer.
2.) There is no reason to think that a Mod knows everything about every aspect of gambling or even necessarily more than some other members would know.
3.) That Branson (I assume, Missouri) doesn't specifically have any casinos? There's no reason for a WoV mod to know that. It would be pretty good for a mod, in my opinion, to know that Missouri has any casinos at all. Even knowing that, it would be still better to know that Missouri only has casinos that are located on rivers (pursuant to their old law---and by the letter of the law, were technically supposed to be actual boats). Even if a mod was aware of both of those things, then the Mod would have to be aware that Branson is even a popular tourist destination in the Show Me State...and even knowing THAT the mod would have to know that Branson is on a lake, not a river.
---In short, I'd say that's a pretty big ask to just assume that an unpaid mod should know all of these things. But, what do I know...I haven't read some specific book that's fifty years old.
Quote:Second point. A mod suspends me for a hooker joke because someone complained it was offensive? And the same mod recommended that if people got their hands on $5 million, they should shoot for "the trifecta" involving (1) paying identical twins for sex, (2) paying a dwarf for sex, and 3) paying a double amputee for sex. I guess mods have their own definitions of offensive. I had no idea "the trifecta" was a thing.
I have to believe that you have a link for that. Perhaps it was before the, "No profanity," rule became more strict. Although, there are certain objectionable things that are permitted to be discussed here, at times.
Quote:Third point: Does gordon really believe nobody reading WoV found that post of his offensive? For personal reasons, I found it highly offensive, nauseating in fact. I have not seen a statute of limitations in the beloved rules, so allow me to file a formal complaint. I am highly offended. Perhaps gordon could suspend himself a few days.
Finally, what does it say about WoV that someone with gordon's nonchalant offensive history was chosen as a moderator? The double amputee crack suggests some sick asymmetric power fantasy. Perhaps, to some extent, moderating also fits that bill.
There's no real set statute of limitations, but if I were a Mod left with the decision, then I would dismiss your complaint as retaliatory.
Actually, there MUST be some sort of statute of limitations, otherwise I could be Nuked for profanity about one thousand times over from before the rule was changed.
As far as Gordon being chosen as a Moderator, I think that decision was made more on the body of his posts than any one post. I directly told someone to F off to somewhere else here once and I was a popular choice to be an Admin again. Everyone has regrettable posts. I don't think that we've 100% embraced cancel culture here, yet.
